[World of Warships] News/Screens/Videos/Infos

[Galien]

Aviation in World of Warships

Aircraft carriers are constantly at work in World of Warships! At sea, aircraft carriers serve as multifunctional Swiss Army knives: they scout territory, aim naval artillery, drain the ammo from enemy antiaircraft guns, and attack enemy ships head-on. Their mobility, versatility and tactical potential make them incredibly potent within the game.

Taking Flight

Air combat in World of Warships is represented by four main aircraft classes: scouts, fighters, dive bombers and torpedo planes. The latter three types of aircraft can be found only on aircraft carriers, but scouts are aboard almost all classes of ships, including some destroyers. Shock squadrons launched from carriers play almost the same role as major caliber guns and because of this, the gameplay changes from action to tactical strategy.

Each type of aircraft requires a fundamentally different approach. It is easy to use a scout: give him directions, and he will scout the route. But, what should be done with shock fighter squadrons like a grouping of dive bombers or torpedo planes? They require a different gameplay style. You can simply launch the squadron set their target, but this is not the most effective way of playing the aircraft carrier class. Poorly organized airstrikes on another battleship, cruiser or even on a group of ships can be destroyed by a wall of AA guns without ever causing a damage. To initiate a successful attack, you need to plan and prepare – choose proper air groupings and then when the time is right, strike the decisive blow.

Each type of shock squadrons has unique characteristics and specific controls. For example, it is critical that torpedo planes set correct directions for attack; you should aim to hit the enemy broadside to increase hit probability. Similarly, you should take into account location and landscape – natural obstacles, such as islands or reefs, may interfere with torpedoes on their way. Dive bombers, on the contrary, are better used to attack from stern, or nose, where AA guns are very effective.

Fighters are the most versatile aircraft launched from carriers. With their help, you can fight off attacks from enemy bombers, carry out diversionary tactics, cover an allied squadron, or simply destroy enemy scouts, “blinding” the opposing team.

At the Wheel

At higher tiers, carriers will carry larger numbers of squadrons at once, but that does not mean that the player will have to be torn apart to keep eye on each unit. Air groups are quite independent: some actions are completely automated, others require players’ control only when it’s necessary, or when the player want to manage squadrons for a specific purpose. For example, a squadron can choose the shortest route to the destination or return to refuel. The player can choose which part the air group he can take part in: simply launch the aircraft and set the target or guide them through the whole route, evading enemy fire, grouping them for striking the highest-priority targets. Of course, in the second case, air operations will be more effective, but in the heat of battle, some actions can be left completely at the mercy of automation.

Planes Vs. Air Defense

Carriers in their history have come a long way from helper class to heavy shock ships. They will progress similarly through development as you make your way through the tiers of World of Warships: from sluggish and slow-moving monsters with a single air group at tier I to heavily armored ships with lots of squadrons on board. Moreover, development will not only be quantitative but also qualitative. Planes will also improve and develop: from biplane to well-armed fighting units, dive bombers and torpedo planes, and of course AA guns will be developing with them.

The violent clash of antiaircraft guns and attacking squadrons calls to mind a deadly dance and even resembles a separate game within the game. For example, to ease the work for aircraft, allied ships can use explosive shells to destroy part of the air defense systems of the selected target. The player’s task will be to bring the attacking group to the target from the right side.

The enemy, in turn, may try to take a defensive position with his damaged side against the shore and thereby prevent the launch of torpedoes from planes; by maneuvering actively, he might hide from the range of AA guns of enemy ships, or ask for help from a friendly aircraft carrier.

The outcome of the aerial battle affects the overall outcome, and the main task for the player is to learn to turn these conflicts to his advantage.

-> http://blog.worldofwarships.eu/aviation ... -warships/

[Galien]

New Site for World of Warships: an epic puzzle from an international team

If you type ”World of Warships” into your browser search bar, the very first link will lead you to one of the game’s promo sites. Up to now it has looked like this:

World of Warships has not required a fully branched portal, although it will inevitably get one soon. It has already outgrown the “business card site” format and, last year, the game witnessed several important milestones. The alpha version went live and the game finally got its own blog where the developers were given an official broadcasting channel to fill with new content week in week out. Previous versions of the promo-site failed to reflect these vital developments and it soon became apparent that something needed to be changed. All that followed was, to a large extent, a result of brilliant teamwork.

Unlimited Creativity

Everything started with the initial visit of Ivan Moroz to the St Petersburg office with a task for us. We were asked to create a new, high-quality and contemporary promo-site that utilised parallax technology – an optical illusion of independently moving layers and, in our case, one that would involve ships.

The challenge was accepted and work started in the typical manner for a designer- with initial sketches. Both St Petersburg and Minsk-based artists joined forces to face the task of creating a static picture that would be coupled with moving elements.

Some of the proposed variants looked nice only in the static state and not when they were moving. Others looked pretty dynamic but did not consider the technical aspects of the project.

From left to right: Media, About game, Fan Kit, Blog, Testers, Forum, Social Networks

Finally we chose a sketch. The art was developed in St Petersburg and the technical/design aspects in Kharkiv; Minsk coordinated all activities. So, essentially, three countries were involved in the process.

The next stage demanded our “rendermen” to choose the desired models of vessels to be depicted and to figure out the light sources in the picture.

This was Julia’s task as she was the artist and the ideological leader behind the creation of the picture.

Thanks to her enthusiasm and communication skills, a number of colleagues from adjacent departments were also involved. Here you may see our video team explaining wave movement laws …

Illustration of a porposal from our video team; From left to right: 1). We raised the heights of the waves, like this , 2). Where possible we also broadened the wave heights.

… and Eugene Zaitsev, our skilful 3D-modeller, who succeeded in turning a stern sea into something more “foamy”. The mountains in the background also became more realistic.

The work was still in progress when we had to check the authenticity of the plane in the foreground. As we specialise mainly in ships, we had to avoid any blunders with depictions of period aviation. Vladimir Gremitskiy, our military vehicle consultant, was on vacation at this time, so we decided to send this issue to our specialists in the Kiev office.

As a result of this “find a plane” quest, that involved people from both Minsk and Kiev, we received the desired high-polygonal model. The plane was finally taking off!

The hardest part of the job was still to be accomplished, specifically, conjoining all the elements into one harmonic display. At this point, Julia was almost inseparable from the picture. Over and over again we altered the water and foam patterns, applying and removing details. The heroes of this epic image cannot evade such a fate as well – we were looking for the most expressive picture possible.

n pursuing excellence, we are constantly discussing all the difficult and complex aspects of our work with our international team. Ultimately, we provide our colleagues from Kharkiv with the initial, raw image and wait for it to be implemented into the site design. Their efforts make a miracle happen – the picture becomes dynamic, enriched by various interfaces.

Even though parallax hasn’t been tweaked yet and its movements are a bit strange, we finally can see it working and can understand what should be done next. Polishing the art continues, now with consideration given to the specific dynamics. For instance, we had to introduce an additional correction for the tracers’ trajectory.

Having addressed our Art QA department for a historical expertise, we found new ways for further improvements…

Detailed comments from the Art QA deptartment are a source of grief and pain for any artist, although, this topic is beyond the scope of our article!
Translation: Incorrect tracer trajectories. It was better to make this in 3D using separate cylinders in a separate layers. There should be 3 guns and tracers on each side of the plane. Flashes from the guns are not something that would happen in reality. We also added 3 spent ammunition magazines under each wing.

Being a true artist, Julia never ceases in the search for perfection. She seems to never stop adding corrections. Finally everything is polished from the biggest part down to the tiniest details and all fragments are arranged into layers. The epic puzzle is finally alive!

Our mission is over and it’s time for the Kharkiv team to do the rest of the job. Their duty now is the technical implementation and overall design of the site itself. There is no point in talking further, you should just see it for yourself!

As an ending note, it is said that man can endlessly watch three things: the flow of water, the fire glow and others at work. Even though the process of our mutual efforts remains behind the scenes, despite this modest attempt at showing it, the two former two are widely represented in worldofwarships.eu.

Enjoy!

-> http://blog.worldofwarships.eu/new-site ... onal-team/

[Galien]

World of Warships Developer Diaries – (1) Introduction

Captains,



We are proud to present you the first episode of our Developer Diaries video series. This time, we are taking an extensive look at the unique features of naval warfare, the huge fleet of combat vessels and their classes.

The World of Warships development team will dive into the complex research that goes into creating and maintaining the game’s historical authenticity, as well as the tactical approaches for conquering the high seas with the different types of combat vehicles that players will have at their command, including the aircraft carriers, massive battleships, heavy cruisers, and the light and agile destroyers.

The series will continue to focus on the upcoming naval action MMO game and the team behind it, focusing on each aspect of the project throughout its development.


Enjoy the show!

-> http://blog.worldofwarships.eu/world-of ... roduction/

[Galien]

Wargaming.net Unveils New World of Warships Cinematic Trailer

Captains,

A violent, raging storm sweeps across the sea. Waves crash over massive warships. Steel and saltwater collide. American and Japanese battleships and cruisers take up their positions. They clash dramatically under the roll of thunder.

Ship vs ship and ship vs storm – what will the aftermath be? Find out by viewing the trailer now!

Action Stations!

What do you think about it, Captains?

-> http://blog.worldofwarships.eu/wargamin ... c-trailer/

[Galien]

Closed Alpha Test in Numbers – May Update

Captains!


With May ending we’d like to share with you some updated statistics from the Closed Alpha Test!


Over and out!

-> http://blog.worldofwarships.eu/closed-a ... ay-update/

[Galien]

Testing Times: How we test World of Warships

If it comes down to a decision between what’s realistic and what’s fun, we’re going to choose the fun path and then rationalise it based on some obscure historical incident…

© Sid Meier

As we said in our previous article (link), our number one tool for auto testing is bots. For our developers bots are wonderful and make life much easier. However, bots are unable to check whether the graphics and interface are working correctly. They just have no graphics, no interface. Therefore, to check these important elements of World of Warships we also work with a special test version of the client.

Our First Attempts

At first, we tried to approach the problem of mass testing using head-on, by taking a test tool that allows you to search for desired images on the screen and, with its help, perform a simple test. No sooner said than done, the tool worked and even coped with completing complex tests, such as checking that a ship burns in the right way. However, this tool was always breaking down. Any action performed by the artist – adjusting light, changing image sizes, adding new visual effects etc. – interfered with the tool’s performance.

Still, this tool was useful, especially in simple routine tasks. On command, the tool took the latest game version, unfolded it on a test stand and quickly tested it, reporting: “Task complete! Game works!” Otherwise, it was collecting a list of errors and sending notifications about them. At night, the tool was doing its work and in the morning we received an e-mail saying either that “Everything is fine” or giving a list of errors like – “I cannot find the ship at the dock!”

However, many regular failings of this tool interfere with our work and so we began to look for other options…

A solution from another field

In web application development, the kind of problems of checking that we face are also common, like how checking a website through a simple search is not the most reliable method of doing so. A slight change in design can break such a test. So the solution for the problem is to use a special test framework, i.e. a set of functions for creating tests, which considers the entire page as a single object with a defined purpose. Accordingly, the test tool does not function as a test by functioning like “find the button with a picture ‘Send’ and press it” but instead it tries to perform the operation “press ‘Send’ button” itself. The idea was taken on board.

Adaptation

The direct transfer of this approach to game development was impossible for the obvious reason that test objects are completely different to those that are displayed in a browser. So Automators, together with developers, had to work hard to find how to adapt it into a solution for our game. As a result, automatic scripts were able to access controls on testbeds.

And now, when we are launching an automatic smoke-test just to check if it works, the tool does not look for an image; it now works directly with interface elements. Our colleagues liked that the developers could now run a quick check before it is given to players for testing.

How does it work?

During the test, the automated test client simulates a player staring at the screen and searching for the necessary elements to achieve something like “Go to the dock” or “check presence of all menu items and ships.” These things are the typical operations and responsibilities for the test version of the client and, in the future, it will allow for a full check up on tech trees to ensure that all the connections are there or not.

This automated test client, of course, has its drawbacks too and cannot check the aesthetic qualities of maps, for example. However, it has helped to greatly reduce the amount of manual checkups required.

For example, recently during a check of a new U.S. battleship, it was discovered that it would not sink after a torpedo attack. As it turned out, the ship had quite good anti-torpedo protection. The real ship too had one of the best anti-torpedo protection systems and weak destroyer-torpedoes couldn’t do any damage. In reality, Japanese torpedoes of that time could penetrate even a submarines defences, so something had to be altered.

We have a game that should be fun to play. Guided by the widely known motto – “In the case of having to choose between gameplay and realism you should choose gameplay” - we started our reconfiguration. Such torpedoes should be able to destroy the first section of anti-torpedo protection and the second wave would destroy the bulkhead between the engine room and anti-torpedo protection.

Teamwork with auto-bots.

Currently we are trying to build something that would allow our tests to incorporate the work of bots and the test client simultaneously. While one “part” of such test, i.e. the test bots, is busy with mass checkups, the client is free to check if everything works correctly during the battle, let’s say, if the sinking of a ship is correctly causing the score to change without error.

We also use functions like replays and battle recordings to help with the process of testing but that’s a story for different time…

-> http://blog.worldofwarships.eu/testing- ... -warships/

[Galien]

Wargaming.net and World of Warships at E3 2014

Wargaming.net took to the floor at this year’s E3 with its games, naturally, taking centre stage!

The other big announcement was the revealing of a global release date for the much-anticipated mobile game World of Tanks Blitz which will be available for iPad and iPhone users from June 26.

While it may not have been the focal point of Wargaming’s booth at this year’s E3, World of Warships certainly didn’t go unnoticed. Indeed, few could have missed our awe-inspiring new, cinematic trailer, The Storm, which was featured in a recent development blog post.



If you did miss it by chance, you can watch it again below:

You don’t have to go to E3 to find all this cool stuff out! Stay tuned to this blog for all the latest information on developments from World of Warships.


Action Stations!

-> http://blog.worldofwarships.eu/wargamin ... t-e3-2014/

[Galien]

You ask, We answer – round 4

Captains!


We’d like to share with you a short video with World of Warships Devs answering some of your questions

Actions Stations!

-> http://blog.worldofwarships.eu/you-ask- ... r-round-4/

[Galien]

World of Warships Tournament Report! pt. 1

On May 24 there was a tournament for World of Warships players. In a fierce duel, team “PS-PS-PS” managed to defeat the Royal Navy team, champions of the previous tournament and reach the top of the standings. We asked the team and its captain to share some tips and tricks that reveal their own recipe for victory.


The Team

DarkSkalD – Cruiser “New Orleans”
Captain. Destroyed ships and was also destroyed. Yelled in the microphone constantly. To the amazement of all, this helped lead them to victory.

Alpetro – Destroyer “Fletcher”
Thanks to his quick thinking, we managed to win the most difficult team battle.

slavjn00 – Destroyer “Fletcher”
His smoke saved an allied cruiser in the final battle and allowed them to destroy enemy squadrons. That’s what we call being in the right place at the right time.

Kuman – Destroyer “Fletcher”
Deputy of the Captain. Author of numerous combat tactics and operational planning.

Haales - Destroyer “Fletcher”
On the Alpha server he’s known as a skilled destroyer player. He is able to destroy at least half of a team with his destroyer alone.

w3rw01f – Aircraft Carrier “Zuikaku”
One of our Aircraft carriers, who plays a key role in the game.

Akasin – Aircraft Carrier “Zuikaku”
Originator of many ideas of how to use Aircraft carriers in battle. Without a doubt, having aircraft carriers on the team helped us win this tournament.

Black_Hunter – Cruiser “New Orleans”
One of the true Alpha test veterans, he knows the game from when it was called World of Battleships! His eight 8″ guns provided a great advantage to our team during the most intense phase of battle.

Basic Rules and Tournament Features

DarkSkalD
Players had to play on the map “Glacier” with one base. Glacier is a very beautiful winter map with a lot of icebergs and glaciers on it. Despite this, there are lots of places for maneuvering.

According to the rules, teams could consist of up to 9 people with 16 points for share. Aircraft carriers or battleships cast 4 points, cruisers and destroyers 2 and 1 point, respectively. Each team could have no more than 2 aircraft carriers.

These rules were favorable for destroyers (smoke, torpedoes, high speed and maneuverability, fast base capture) and cruisers (destroying enemies and protecting allied destroyers, AA guns). And so it was — though carriers played their roles well, and in this tournament they were a dominating force.

Alpetro
The “feature” of the tournament was a slot system. If in a previous tournament, players had to choose from any ship, now they had to think wisely which ship to choose (from a limited choice of ships).

Did you have a plan of action in place? If so, what?

DarkSkalD
Tournament rules allowed you to play in deferent setups, but we decided to choose a universal one. Our team included 2 Cruisers, 4 Destroyers and 2 Carriers, which were dominating in the air. Such a setup allowed us to fight against teams who chose destroyers and destroy battleships with the help of carriers. Our tactics were based on controlling the base with carrier support. The carriers received carte blanche for their actions and worked almost independently. They also had priority in choosing a target.

Alpetro
Taking into account the small size of the map, we initially expected a maneuverable fight in a circle (base). It was important to keep a balance between the number of destroyers and supporting ships.

Kuman
The plan was simple – destroy them all. Seriously, our strategy was based on the setup and spawn points. I loved how our captain was doing his job. He took advice and at the same time managed to unite us as one.

w3rw01f
Plans? Plans are made to be changed during the game J. It’s impossible to create a perfect plan. You always need to adapt it according to the situation and improvise a lot. Also, your skill plays a great role in the battle.

Tell us a bit about each battle that commenced.

DarkSkalD

We faced 3 teams. The first team was the developers’ team, “Black Sails.” We were afraid that this team would kick us out of the tournament. But as they were busy with creating the game, they didn’t manage to gather all together and were playing without some players. So we easily destroyed them.

The second battle was against “Fleet of Open Sea #1″ (FOS) – a very skilled and experienced team with the famous Tarkiriatan as a captain. In the beginning we learned that they were betting on the “Fubuki” destroyers , which allowed them to fire one torpedo salvo more than our “Fletchers.” Their support were “Pensacola”cruisers, which at first seemed to be easy targets as their light armored turrets were easy to destroy, and aiming time left much to be desired.

My team tactics were simple as they could be: cruisers and destroyers had to destroy their attacking ships in the capture circle, as we hoped that the Fletchers’ artillery guns would give us advantage in close fights. But our enemy found a way to surprise us. FOS had a very tactful game: they used group torpedo launches, covering huge territory with it, with wisely built Air defense, and their aviation worked cohesively. It was a severe battle – our carriers lost the battle in air, and their destroyer bombarded us with torpedoes. Battle was divided in several small skirmishes, as it was impossible to focus fire on one target.

We were saved by our skill and some luck. We lost one Fletcher ,but managed to destroy their destroyers and cruisers, though they were trying to ram us using the smoke cover. The last of the FOS carriers started capturing the base. Our Zuikaku, together with one Fletcher, were against him. The FOS carrier launched dive bombers, and for a moment we thought that he would manage to destroy our carrier, but a timely smoke cover saved our ship. By that time, our Fletcher launched a salvo of torpedoes and decided the battle.

The third battle was against the winners of first tournament, team “Royal Navy”. This team consisted of skilled players who were good at sea battles. Unlike the FOS team, which bet on torpedoes, Royal Navy was playing from destroyers’ artillery. It worked in our favor – superiority in the number of cruisers and armoring was on our side.

After a severe battle with FOS, we decided to give up the idea of fighting for base and use counterattacking tactics: destroyers and cruisers were to gather at the edge of base and only after smoke cover was placed, get into the battle. In addition, the enemy’s superiority in the number of destroyers clearly alluded an undesirability of close battles until cruisers equalized chances.

We were lucky with the respawn – a New Orleans appeared close to one of our destroyers, which allowed us to perform a unique tactic in escaping from the enemy’s aviation: “dive into smoke”. Soon, the main enemy forces started capturing the base and set smoke cover. So later, it all was according to plan – cruisers and destroyers were firing and jumping out of smoke, and later went into the circle to reset the cap. A more-or-less controlled phrase of battle soon turned into a chaotic battle in smoke.

Soon, the first ships were destroyed – well-aimed artillery fire and a Fletcher torpedo salvo collected its harvest. My Orleans, together with destroyers, dove into base and destroyed one destroyer with a 203mm gun and the other by ramming it. But later I was damaged by dive bombers, and destroyed by a small torpedo salvo.

Our Zuikaku also suffered a lot; it was under fire all the time. Hit after hit after hit — we thought that it would go down, but that Japanese ship continued the battle and survived till the end of it. By this moment, the Royal team lost most of their ships, but they also destroyed a large number of our ships. Luckily, the advantage was on our side and we managed to destroy our enemy completely.



Second part of this article will be published on Saturday, June 21.

-> http://blog.worldofwarships.eu/world-of ... port-pt-1/

[Galien]

World of Warships Tournament Report! pt. 2

World of Warships Tournament: The Winning Recipe

Tell us about some interesting moments in battle.

Alpetro
In semifinals against FOS team, almost at the end of the battle, my Fletcher was left alone in the base circle. Those emotions when you sail alone in smoke knowing that enemies are close to you are unforgettable.

Kuman
It is hard for me to say anything, as before the battle I’m the one who is creating all the tactics for the team, but in battle I’m completely absorbed with controlling my ship and it is hard for me to see the overall picture. Everything is in smoke, water boils from enemy fire, torpedoes try to hit me and I must maneuver. So I don’t have time to remember – I must survive.

But I have 2 moments I can share: In the second battle, while I was capturing the base, I was barely managing to dodge enemies’ and allied torpedoes. And suddenly an enemy’s cruiser jumps out of smoke, under control of Tarkiriatan. It was trying to ram me, so I tried to dodge him as much as I can. I had no torpedoes ready so I was firing my turret gun. I was lucky that my guns turned to the right and I was able to cause some damage to it. Unfortunately, it did not save my ship, but I damaged the cruiser a lot.

In the finals, I have used sly tactics against the enemy carrier. I was hiding behind an iceberg, then went to flank him. However, I did not have a clear view of him, but I remembered his position. As it turned out, my maneuvers were clearly visible to the enemy but I managed to not only fire 8 torpedoes, but also survive.

Did you have any moments in the game where you thought you were done for? And if so, how did you overcome them?

Kuman
Each battle except for the first one had such moments. But they are the most memorable ones. And because of such moments, you have to play. The adrenaline, storm of emotions, trembling hands and sweaty back! How did we cope with it? We just played.

DarkSkalD
The second battle against “FOS”, when my team, after a successful enemy air attack was left with 2 Zuikakus and Fletchers. FOS had a great advantage but we had little doubts in our loss.

Our team was saved by the skills of our players. Carriers managed to work well from the air, and cruisers and destroyers were successful at holding the enemy till the main forces came.
Is it down to luck or well-thought-out tactics?

DarkSkalD
Tactics… a good word. But sometimes tactics are crushed against enemies who try to play without any tactics. Sometimes, only luck with good aim can destroy an enemy’s destroyer running at full speed. So you can’t play without luck, either.

Alpetro
I played a destroyer. During severe battles at the base circle in smoke, when 5-6 cruisers are hunting you… well, luck is what you need, but also, the minimap can save your life.

Kuman
I suppose that luck is a result of good training.

Which tactics work 100% for sure?

w3rw01f
I played a carrier, so I based my tactics on the strengths and weaknesses of the class. For attacking enemies’ air groups, you need to launch all the fighters, as the strike must be quick and decisive. I try to conduct a fight under protection of my allied AA guns. As a fighting unit I use divebombers, as it is hard to avoid them.

Alpetro
Tactics always die first. That is why 100% successful tactics are possible when the enemy is completely inactive.

DarkSkalD
Keep calm and do your job!

-> http://blog.worldofwarships.eu/world-of ... port-pt-2/

[Galien]

Interview with Artur – Associate Publishing Producer

Captains!


One month has passed, so it’s high time for another round of our Q&A session with developers!

This time we’ll be hosting Artur Ev1n, Associate Publishing Producer in European region. He was our guest some time ago, so again you’ll have a chance to ask him more questions. Artur likes all things connected with both games and the military, though feel free to ask him about anything you would like to know

This Thursday, June 26, Artur ev1n will be answering your questions! All you need to do is to enter your question(s) as a comment to this post.

The interview will last one hour: from 16.00 GMT to 17.00 GMT (17.00 CEST to 18.00 CEST).



Previous sessions of “interactive interviews”: Petr “PPK”, The_Challenger, Ev1n (first round), Danny, Andrey, Mikhail, Pavel, Sergey



See you all on Thursday!

-> http://blog.worldofwarships.eu/intervie ... -producer/

[Galien]

End of an Era: The Challenges of Picking a Historic Timeframe for World of Warships

Hello to everyone, reading our Developers’ Blog!


Today I’d like to reveal some of the concepts behind the era choice for World of Warships. As you may have learned already – despite the game being a part of a Wargaming trilogy (along with World of Tanks and World of Warplanes) – the period it covers is wider than the scope for the latter two by about by 20 years. World of Warships thus represents the period between the 1900s and 1950s.

I’d like to make some additional clarification about this selection. Considering the era that the upcoming game would cover, developers sought for certain technical and tactical uniformity in shipbuilding technologies and overall shipbuilding strategies.
Defining the upper limit of the period didn’t make for any problems. The major act of warfare in the century, WWII, conditioned the development directions and compositions of fleets for the victorious countries, whereas leaving the defeated opponents without any naval forces at all, unable to recover their production. After the war there generally was no intention to produce any ships larger than a destroyer. Some countries were busy finishing the projects that were planned during the war, consequently leaving the built vessels to be used as spares or simply selling them abroad. Moreover, the end of WWII resulted in the extinction of “battle wagons“ and gun cruisers. The first decades of the Cold War were noted for the rise in the number of submarine and anti-submarines ships – these classes are initially not going to be represented World of Warships. So essentially, we had no other choice but to set the game’s upper limit to the beginning of the 1950s.


The lower limit of the game’s timeframe, on the other hand, revealed some issues. All naval enthusiasts are aware of the variety of technical solutions and evolutions of 19th century steam-powered vessels, the perplexities of the so-called “dreadnought race”, the Washington epoch, the arms race prior to WWII and so on. So we faced a problem – which period to choose as the beginning?

Obviously, for the sake of the trilogy’s internal uniformity, it made sense to align to the time-frame of the two neighboring projects that begin in the 1920s. World of Tanks and World of Warplanes embrace the time period of WWII coupled with some technical concept vehicles like the Bf-109B and Grumman F3F or prewar models that didn’t take part in the period as such, like the Т-26 and Renault FT tanks, for example.


Unfortunately, 1921 – 1938 were so-called “vacation” years for the shipbuilding industry with 3 capital ships built in total: the British ships Nelson and Rodney and the French Dunkirk. The rest of the nations relied on modernised battleships that used to fight in WWI. Essentially, they represented the core of the navy at the beginning of WWII. Destroyers and light cruisers built during WWI also constituted significant part of the global fleet in 1939. Generally, the scale of interwar shipbuilding programs barely resembled the rush to build ships that characterised the beginning of the century; although the dynamics started to change rapidly before WWII broke out.


This naturally brought us to making the decision to widen the game’s timeframe in order to include WWI as well, with all the famous ships of that period, like the “Sevastopol” and “Lion” class cruisers. Instantly we ran into a dilemma: which period we should choose as a starting point and whether to include vessels built in 1914 or only those which participated or survived WWI. It was decided to rely on our need for technical uniformity to ensure that a ship of the lowest tiers won’t fundamentally differ from the highest. World of Warships’s timeframe therefore starts with an era that saw all the world’s major fleets in bloom with the intensive development of all vessel classes and tactical ideas. In short, we chose to start the game’s timeframe in the period prior to WWI, the so-called “dreadnought race”, initiated by the English “Dreadnought” battleship that hit the waters in 1905.

All leading maritime countries rapidly initiated construction of similar vessels – “dreadnoughts” which were characterised by their large-calibre cannons and oil-powered turbine engines instead of ancient steam machinery. A number of slender-but-speedy scout cruisers were also built as well for reconnaissance purposes at that time and destroyers seemed to put on a lot of weight, getting extra torpedo tubes in order to cope with enemy battleships. The first experiments with aviation were also initiated during this period. In WWI, a number of cruisers were re-equipped as aircraft transports. Thus all of the ships presented in the game have some technical uniformity: they are powered by turbines, are well armoured (except for the tiniest destroyers and some aircraft carriers), they carry non-automatic armaments (generally in a linear-ascending scheme) and they manage speeds of 20-25 knots.



Of course, this doesn’t remove rare exclusions like the last steam battleship the USS Texas, or the USS Des Moines heavy cruiser, equipped with automatic major calibre guns, as well as the Soviet Leningrad class-leading destroyers. This actually means that the game won’t include armoured pre-dreadnought ships even though they took part in WWI. Low cruise speeds, acceleration problems, short firing ranges and low aiming mechanization all contributed to our exclusion of these vessels as a part of World of Warships. They turned to be too weak against the first “real” dreadnoughts – something that would have been pretty obvious even a century ago. Besides, instead of being placed in battle arrays, these ships were usually utilised for attacking fortifications on shore and supporting ground forces. The same reasons, namely their low firing rate and low armament, excluded belted cruisers and torpedo boats. Aircraft carriers appeared only in 1915, 12 years after the initial flight of the Wright Brothers. Nevertheless this fact doesn’t mean that there’s completely no chance to witness some remarkable pre-dreadnought era samples, like French battleship “Danton” and Russian “Andrey Pervozvanniy”.

As a result, we managed to create harmonic and balanced tech trees for World of Warships. The timeframes that we chose allowed for the embracing of the most important milestones of naval history in the 20th century and allowed us to include prominent ships of the eras.

I hope naval history enthusiasts will appreciate this.

-> http://blog.worldofwarships.eu/end-of-a ... -warships/

[Galien]

Perfectionists: The ArtQA Team of World of Warships

On December, 5th a new element, the ArtQA, was added to the Lesta Studio Art Department’s work flow. The idea of creating a structure that would consult artists and secure the historical accuracy of the models and their technical and technological parameters, was not a new one. In fact, it was derived from our Kiev colleagues in Рersha Studio.

The first lead of the department was Urmas Laul. Currently he occupies the position of leading project engineer, in charge of the so-called “paperships”, the vessels that never hit the waters and existed only as drafts or sketches. Urmas once worked as a chief constructor in a Marine Engineering Bureau and possesses huge experience in civilian shipbuilding. Together with the head of the Art Department, Vladimir Gremistkiy, they both became teachers for all the young ArtQA specialists. A major part of our team had never dealt with the shipbuilding industry; that’s why we had to devote a lot of time and efforts to get up to speed.

The process of learning was ceaseless. We constantly ran into something new to soak and get used to. It was a hard time both mentally and physically and initially, there might have been a hint of antipathy between artists and the newbies from ArtQA.

Every department has its own specifics. In the case of the ArtQA, this is represented by the fact that not all people have a clue what our mission is. People tend to defend their works from criticism, often in spite of constructive arguments, yet criticism is one of the main tools of ArtQA specialists. You should also understand that our criticism exists for the sake of our mutual project. This is why we even came up with our own proverb: “It’s nothing personal, just ArtQA”.

As time passed, we got more and more experienced and the department also expanded. Currently there are seven people working for it. The specialization of ArtQA is pretty narrow, we aren’t responsible for LODS, props airplanes or anything like that. Our subjects are simply the ships and their equipment.


Let me discourage you from thinking that 7 people is an excessive number for this job. Ships are very complex objects that demand a lot of attention. Normally, a destroyer requires up to 40 hours of quality checks. In the case of an aircraft carrier, this term extends to between 55 and 60 hours.


The whole process is split into 5 parts:

1. Initial setup checks. This section involves the examination of drafts and seeing if features are accurately arranged.

2. Hull checks. This stage includes consistency checks between the model’s hull design and historical sources.

3. Examination of settings. This part involves checks for consistency between reference data and current settings, elements and mechanisms.

4. Next is the examination of miscellaneous objects. This part includes checks of various equipment arrangements based on the reference data.

5. The examination of texture aspects. Here we examine the display accuracy for various technical elements on our ship models like portholes, rivets, electrical wiring etc.

Basically this is the sequence that a ship goes through when it is handed over to our department in order to be checked. Frequently, some of the checks are performed simultaneously or, vice versa, split into several parts. For instance, stages 3 and 4 are checked at the same time as they are mutually dependent. Texture quality checks are usually fragmented, as separate hull accuracy checks save a lot of time for the next steps. Usually ArtQA specialists check each step twice. In a case where three or more checks are needed, the situation becomes subject to an “investigation” aimed at removing such necessities in the future.


The ArtQA department secures the highest quality of our ships. There is anecdotal evidence that we’re infected by an incurable sickness called “perfectionism”, though, in our case, this is more a normal state than some sort of deviation. This how we work – keeping the quality ultimate. You may see the motto that we stick to in the “Mission” section on our portal: “We deliver legendary online games. Globally. With passion.” This approach allows us to always keep ahead of the game.


The battle for quality begins right at the moment when we get the task to check an item. It involves the mind and habits of the artist himself. Controlling production levels and securing this tradition are the most important aspects of our duty and the shortest way to a disciplined work ethic.

It should be noted that this approach is very effective. The minimization of errors during the production process saves us a lot of time.


Of course some collisions between artists and ArtQA specialists are inevitable but are successfully overcome due to our mutual efforts. Realizing common problems and looking for solutions helps us to interact constructively. Having a common goal and desire to make a quality product will surely deal with any sort of troubles that are in our way.


Essentially we stick to two concepts in our job:

"Diligence and vitality”

Thanks for reading!



PS. Do not be afraid to make some mistakes, we will keep you in check.

-> http://blog.worldofwarships.eu/perfecti ... -warships/

[Galien]

Closed Alpha Test in Numbers – June Update

Captains!



With July beginning we’d like to share with you some updated statistics from the Closed Alpha Test!

Over and out!

-> http://blog.worldofwarships.eu/closed-a ... -update-2/

[Galien]

A Quick Q&A with the Developers

Action Stations! Let’s start with the questions:



Will there be any sort of hit points in World of Warships, or any other solutions for damage model?
Well, these vessels are pretty rigid units – you could hardly sink one with a single shot, or even a salvo. Actually you’d need, rather, a series of hits to do this. That’s why we need some sort of visualisation of a ship’s current status of effectiveness so as to make it easier for players. Hit points may differ a lot. We may easily compute them for aft and stern sections, on the other hand it is far more difficult to do that for the bulwark. Damaging underwater sections may lead to sinking or at least a loss of speed etc. That’s why a low amount of HP for a battleship doesn’t actually mean that she may now be destroyed by a single shot. Instead, hit points are used to indicate effectiveness e.g. low hit points might mean her artillery is severely damaged, her speed is decreased and perhaps, that only the bulwark is keeping her hull still afloat. So you, additionally, require a couple of lucky penetrations in her 300mm thick armor to end this all for good…


It is widely known that in the beginning of 20th century, the majority of ships were powered by coal and, subsequently, oil. Those which used coal were damasked and patterned by their exhaust fumes. Will you represent this in your game?
This visual effect largely depends on the engine output. Of course, this will affect ship’s appearance, we are currently performing tests and discussing this feature and its influence on gameplay.

Will you add friendly fire?
Yes, you will have the possibility of damaging your allies. This may hardly be done without purpose though – shells travel with curved trajectories, so friendly fire may take place only for allies that are approaching your target or already are nearby it.



Have you got all US and Japanese ships ready for their relevant branches?
We have finished works for almost all the vessels that will be included in the release version for both nations. We will add the possibly of additional branches later on but primarily we will work on new nations to be added into the game later.



The most frequent question you probably hear these days is this one but – when? What about the times for the Closed Beta Test, Open Beta Test etc?
Well, I can say that we’re aiming to launch a Closed Beta Test this year and up to this moment, we’re on track for this.



What is the distance at which you will be able to see enemies that have been spotted by allied ships? As far as I understand, it will be possible to attack such targets as well?
The distance is defined by the observing point altitude and the resulting distance to horizon line. Our ships will have this parameter between 15 and 25 km depending on their size. Indeed you will be able to hit targets spotted by other ships, although we must bear in mind that it wasn’t possible to shoot accurately beyond the horizon in those days.



What measures are taken so as to assure decent performance on slow PC configurations?
All our programmers were given Celeron processors that reaped sizable results. Based on weekly tests performed in the last 3 months, low performance PCs were increased 4 times (one of the test samples even had an Intel HD 4000 videocard).



Will battles be affected by the weather? For instance, waves that push ships towards shallow waters or riffs, any sort of lightning damage, falling/rising tides etc? Will you add crew corpses overboard?
Well, you’re full of ideas, I can see! I can believe we are certainly not including corpses – but lightning won’t be in the release version.

Will you display holes made by each AP shell? Will there be any maximum per ship?
No, we’re not planning to show each specific hole, the vessels have too complex a geometry for that, hundreds of thousands of polygons. We will display damage for the parts that were damaged seriously though, not by some sort of shading effect but rather with visibly mauled interiors that you can see from the external view.



Will it be possible to sink a destroyer by hitting it with a battleship at, say. a speed of 30 knots?
Yes, we have implemented ramming already. Light ships may even be torn apart.



I’m pretty sure that you have encountered ships with imbalanced characteristics while making the game. What ways to solve this do you use – adjusting or “upping” other ships?
Throughout their service, most ships have witnessed many modernisations, drastically changing their parameters. This fact paves way for their effective balancing. For instance we may just refrain from some inconvenient modifications or push them into higher/lower tiers and so on.



A question about the upcoming test. Do you have any thoughts on the ways you’re going to invite people to take part in the Closed Beta?
This will not be the first test for Wargaming, so the procedure is pretty worn in. The actual process is best explained by the Publisher.



How are you going to run the alpha test? Have the results of invited testers been satisfactory?
They work perfectly which amazes us somewhat! Some of them have 3-4 times more battles than we thought was possible. Besides that, they manage to cover other game–related activities whether it is basic training for beginners, participation in tournaments or even cooperating on petitions when they think we’re not paying enough attention to certain aspects of the game.

What will happen in cases where a ship runs into a sinking vessel that’s partially submerged and still sticking out from the water?
Our maps have regions with shallow waters that may be crossed by destroyers only. Others are quite passable for all types but getting sunk there may result in superstructures sticking out over the surface. In our game, running over these essentially means running ashore.



Please correct me if I’m wrong: destroyers will have to get considerably closer to a target to see it, even if it was already spotted by allied aircraft carriers? On the other hand battleships will not have to do so?
The answer is pretty close to that. Destroyers have a shorter sight range and are smaller than battleships so naturally they won’t be able to spot huge ships at 25 km, especially if the latter are not shooting or haven’t caught fire yet (otherwise the picture changes considerably).



What game modes have you planned? Capture areas similar to those in World of Tanks?
We’re still working on the game modes so there are no comments for now, sorry.



What will happen to airborne planes when their carrier has been sunk?
Such groups then will fulfill the last command assigned and consequently will patrol the same area. When out of fuel they will be forced to land on water.



Will Sli/CrossFire and multi-core processors be supported?
To learn about this you should wait for the upcoming “An hour with programmers” episode. As far as I know, we support multi-core processors better than World of Tanks and network processing, uploads from HDD and other issues are assigned to separate threads.



Thanks for the questions, see you!

-> http://blog.worldofwarships.eu/a-quick- ... evelopers/