New Mechanics and Consumables – World of Warships

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (1,098 votes, average: 4.73 out of 5)


Discussing recent devblog that details some new mechanics consumables that could make their way the in the near future. Hope you have a wonderful day I’ll catch you next time!

Tier IX French Destroyer Mogador Replay – Warships Friend Invite – Discord Server


  1. I hope “special” ammo is not same as WoT because it will kill the game

  2. The first should make sure the roma can hit something cause the dispersion of the shells is shameful.

    • Historically she struggled to hit the broad side of a barn from the inside.

      To be fair though, this was not the ships fault, Quality control in the Italian factories where the Naval Ammunition was produced was…. shoddy to put it mildly. Propellant loads differed enough that when one fired the main batter one could never really be sure exactly where in the general area you were aiming those shells would land, and because the issue was ammunition quality it was not something that could be corrected for!

    • @alganhar1 Historically speaking, Roma never struggled with dispersion, as she entered service later in the war (1942) by which point QC had long since taken care of the propellant issues.
      Generally speaking, ammunition production was fine (and variations in shell weight doesn’t affect dispersion much unless huge chunks of your shells are falling off).

      For the large guns like the 381mm, inconsistent propellant was to blame (±1% variation), which was a relatively brief practice in the late 1930s that only manifested itself (in regards to the Littorio-class battleships) in service aboard Vittorio Veneto in early 1941, causing her dispersion to effectively double from the normal values. Littorio’s dispersion, meanwhile, remained consistent through her life, and for Vittorio Veneto, the issues never popped again after Operation Gaudo. To say that it was a consistent issue of the career of the ships is incorrect, especially if you’re trying to apply it to Roma, who never experienced the phenomenon her sister did.

  3. Steven Wiederholt

    I refer you to Murphy’s 4th law “No matter how hard you try to please everyone….someones not gonna like it.”

  4. More like italian BBs will have no HE as that is actually historical. Only AP and semiAP… THAT would be pretty interesting.

    • MidnightPhoenix07

      Historical accuracy and WoWS definitely don’t belong in the same sentence

    • @Caden Grace I agree, maybe they should start over again from scratch and introduce a “base EXP” skill-based Match-Team Making, which coupled with historical accuracy and more realistic game style would make the game a fantastic playing experience!

    • @Lorenzo Deho 1) How do you define skill, what stats do you use? How do you use them? What are your ‘skill’ ranges. I am sure the unicums will be delighted to find they have to spend 5 hours waiting per game, utterly delighted. Not. Skill based matchmaking in games like WoWS always *sound* good in theory, in application its not going to solve *any* problems, just going to add more to the mix.

      2) Realism… oh wonderful, why bother playing ANYTHING other than a BB or CV then? Realistically DD’s and Cruisers (both light and heavy) are going to do precisely jack squat against BB’s, unless they get lucky with their *single* torpedo runs, as that is all they would get. I would be utterly *delighted* to play a ship type that has 0 use other than spotting, a mechanic that has no rewards in WoWS. Add to this I would rather not spend four hours maneuvering my ships into an advantageous position in order to engage…. Not to mention having to wait at LEAST half an hour for a CV’s strike wing to rearm and refuel… I suppose you are going to want them to sail into the wind to launch as well? Shall we model the deck warping on BB’s when the main battery goes off as well?

      3) Another issue with realism, we know how ships that actually *existed* would work, but what about the many, many paper designs? Design flaws are not neccesarily evident in paper designs, issues with quality control and build quality may well rear their ugly heads only after the ships are finished. Maybe their power plant could not produce the shaft horsepower the makers promised, maybe quality control of your ammunition manufacturers bites you in the arse. How would you like playing an Italian ship of WWII, where terrible QA in the ammunition manufacturers meants that many Italian ships could not hit the broad side of a barn from the INSIDE!

      If you want realism, play a simulator, not an arcade game.

    • @alganhar1 Indeed, I play simulators, where whether or not I win/lose depends on myself only and I must not worry about weekend warriors and such.
      Sorry, dropped the WG galaxy quite some time ago, was too frustrating…
      I’m not stating WoWS is bad, on the contrary: it’s great for the many, I only wrote what it should have for me to be attractive again, free opinion, no criticism, just suggestion, isn’t it?

    • @Yohan Jeong also no reload of torpedoes with exception of a choice of japanese ships that actually carried reloads, bringing back stealth to the most stealthy torpedo of WW2…..

      And HE shell from 10cm japanese mounts because as far as memory serves as far as war went they only had shrapnels for these 😛

      Problem is that full historical is not exacly in line with “fun to play”
      (but that doesn’t mean they cannot use “historical” argument to justify national flavour of branch)

  5. LOL i giggled and spilled my morning office coffee when “IT CAN BE USED FOR EVIL” regarding smoke shells

  6. Sudeshna Das Sharma

    British cruisers have semi armor piercing shell

  7. Smoke shells were NEVER used at sea as the amount of smoke they would create would be insignificant. I don’t think any navy even issued them.

    Not that realism has ever stopped Wargaming…….

  8. World of Warships Magna

    *Magic in the ships so lacking. Starting with the harmless ricochets from musashi on
    destroyers to fantastic creatures in a team, and they are more magical in the WOWs development team than in your.*

    • excuse me but I don`t see how you get ricochets on DDs with 18.1 inch main guns. DD armor is 19mm across the board except Khabarovsk, and 19mm is way smaller than what 18.1 inch can overmatch. Wherever the musashi shell hits a DD, it will, and it should overpen due to overmatching.

    • @Yohan Jeong It can, idk how but even Notser’s older video showed it could be done. The chance is very slim tho.

    • @Edhi Kurniawan damn. why do I not get such luck XD

    • @Yohan Jeong the only DD I can think off with mechanics “as intended” to richochet off musashi/yamato shells is belt armor on khabarovsk and I am not sure if there wasn’t one or two other DDs with crazy belt armor in similar fashion.

      The only other way that would be confirmed to deal 0-damage shot on DD with such gun would be if somehow shell only hit module (torpedo launcher of gun for example) dealing all of it’s damage to that module – but that was described as not exacly intended, and WG keeps claiming fore years that they are “working” on fix for that one.

      if any BB at t9/10 fires as DD that does not have crazy khaba like belt strip and somehow managed to bounce, then it’s bug and I’d fill bug report ticket with replay and stuff because that means somehow overmatch failed to trigger.

  9. “You need just enough penetration to get inside without busting through” – Notser 2019

  10. Agree with your concerns about the smoke shells…. What if they flipped it? Instead of buffing your teammate’s concealment, how about a temporary debuff to the enemy with flare shells / starshells. They could act as area denial or be used in areas where a DD has been spotted but is now undetected.

  11. Isnt the semi armor piercing basically the same as the British cruisers? Like the mino, neptune, fiji ecs.

    • Wouldn’t the semi-AP have less pen than the British AP which just arms quicker?

    • @Henry Greenham IRL the RN shells were called SAP

    • @Dean Grant thanks for the clarification. Was just really going off the simplified game terms.
      But I’ll keep it in mind for next time.

    • @Jeremy Wells I’m guessing more as they are bigger guns on the BB. But pound for pound the brits ammo would be more pen.
      Hopefully WG find a way to differentiate the brits AP and any nation they give “semi-AP” to.

    • @Henry Greenham yeah I think in game terms you are fine, but people will naturally call British shells SAP is all whether or not it fits in game

  12. I think WG could also do a secondary booster consumable. Add a boost to accuracy for Germans, a boost to reload for the US, and some other line can have a boost to range. Adds more flavor to the lines and incentive to get closer. It’s not a over powered consumable and is situational but oh so much fun when the fireworks start.

  13. “If you use your tool correctly, you will go very far” Notser 2019
    Wise words indeed!

  14. WG : lets make a completly OP broken smoke
    Notser : I am really excited about that

    • @DemonLord OTRT to be honest i’m not convinced. hitting a destroyer in smoke is difficult enough when it’s standing still. When it’s moving at top speed, nose to you making a small profile, and you have +100% dispersion due to no target lock? i think you’d have to be a far above average player to be consistently blowing destroyers out of the water while there moving at top speed in a smoke

    • @dan regers i do it all the time if a DD come at you and activates. GS and do t stops you have at least 5-10 second to shoot and then nead to get 2 clicks of him to spot it in the smoke.

    • @DemonLord OTRT that last comment could do with some editing to make it easier to understand. assuming you mean if they come at you and active smoke.. After that what does “GS, and do t stops, you have at least 5-10 seconds too shoot” mean?

      If your talking about current destroyers, they have to get below 14 knots to be hidden in smoke, so that’s why you can see them till they drop speed. These new destroyers will be able to deploy smoke, and stay hidden at top speed.

    • @dan regers Gas smoke

    • except people will use this wrong and as a CV main im excited to sink loliboats with torps

  15. Nathaniel Wordley

    when is radar not going to magically work through islands?

    • @Fanatik I don;t know what/which answer from Conway You are refering too, the answer I have seen delivered on official channels at a point was that it reduced performance of radar cruiser way beyond what they deem agreeable due to the fact that to utilise the thing they’d have to expose themselves. Conaway may have made different explanation later or prior to this statement, but this one is the only one I have seen myself 😉

      Altho the answer I am refering too was also including the “so we’ll playing with 6s delay on when team sees radared ship to give DDs time to react before hell breaks loose on them instead”…

    • @Fanatik inb4 we are refering to same answer and it contained both reasons and it’s just that each one of us remembered the other half 😛

    • @Trejgon thats not the problem the problem is that this anwser i mean is so stupid so why Tier IX premium why new consumables why crazy captains and why new HE spamming super cruisers all this stuff ist not too much for the casual player aha wargaming is kidding us

    • @Fanatik well both variants are kind of silly, I mean the whole point of demand of LoS check on radar was to force radar ships to expose themselves to use radar instead of doing it from complete safety, so argument “well that reduces their surviviability because they cannot use it while hugging that island so no” is (just as) stupid (as saying it’s too complex for players to learn).

      But that would not be first case of WG saying one thing and doing complete oposite – remember that just before they came out with that bright idea of surveilance radar they’ve said they want DDs to go for high risk, high reward playstyle by getting close. And not even full week after that statement was made first leaks of radar surfaced showing that while they made statement how they want them close, they were already working on consumable that will force them to stay at longer ranges.

      Oh remember “we don’t want IJN DDs to be long range torpedo spammers”? and if radar was not good enought to enforce that the very hyped up legendary module for shimakaze was…. module that only makes sense to equip when gearing for long range torpedo spamming (faster torp reload while absolutelly killing traverse speed of launchers).

      It’d seem like there is, I don’t know, discord between what WG does and what WG says….

    • @Trejgon jepp u so right other example Graf Zepelin first it was super op then rework then too mich torp damage must get nerft then planes too fast must be nerft too and then make Ap bombs targetsight super retarted that u cant aim anything and now it is the weakest cv in tier x and i have one too i am so angry

  16. If they want new shells, go with star shells and introduce night battles, dont go taking WoT path…

  17. As WG are busy releasing new money milking machines, I just hope they fix some old ships along the way.

  18. Like we have every issues resolved in this game….

  19. Let’s just imagine an Atlanta firing smoke shells. ?

  20. How about adding star shells. To spot enemy ships for few seconds and having limited number of them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *