World of Warships-Another Torpedo Bug & Repulse In Dockyard

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (609 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)

Hey guys! Today with news of another torpedo bug, Repulse’s release details & more!

Ross Rowley:

Outro Music: Stranger Think- C418

Have a replay?

Join the Discord here!:

0:00 Channel intro
0:15 Torpedo Bug 2
5:30 Repulse In Dockyard
9:18 Superships Returning
13:31 Graphical Overhaul
16:53 Closing


  1. Do they have some kind of quality management or is it all mis-communication? The level of hypocrisy, arrogance, incompetence and sloppiness is unmatched

  2. according to recent spreadsheet the community enjoys the new and engaging torpedo rework

  3. This is a bad enough bug they should withdraw the subs and roll back to the old code. The fix of not looking down just doesn’t work when you are in close quarters combat, no time to think about suddenly looking up, which if you do think to do that, well then you.lose sight of the ship you are shooting at.

    • This has nothing to do with the subs lol

    • @SJ Stewart The initial torp issue was a result of changes made to allow homing torps for subs. This new problem is a knock on effect from trying to fix that issue. Its all dominoes. If this was a commercial product, it would be a case of rollback and fix it, properly. WG have had what, 3, 4 month to fix this and they seem to be making it worse. Rollback, test the changes PROPERLY then re-release.

    • @Opaheke1 they have not made it worse, they fixed a big issue and created a smaller one.

  4. 35% hit ratio on torpedoes? Try 5%

  5. Ships rocking more…. even more RNG when you shoot…

  6. yup valid point..IT IS WG

  7. Getting repulse for free is fine and all. But last years dockyard was released roughly around christmas. So weve still got the most of 3 full months (my full first semester basically) to wait till repulse is released. Even tho shes ready now. I dont know about you but id rather pay for her now than wait 3 months.

  8. Torpedo bug is the only way to land my Shimakaze torps with 1.7km spot range! I aim a ship but i hit the unsuspecting one.

  9. So no British super ship? Guess they’ve got them in the books for a super-carrier when the third iteration rolls around. Perhaps their April Fools Habakkuk wasn’t quite a joke after all.

  10. I’ve found the replays are also glitched, if you fast forward using > your ship its all bugged in the replay, if you press < to go backwards it sends you to the loading screen until you close the replay in task manager. Don't remember this happening in the last patch.

  11. This bug is far worse than the turning one. They’re just going every which way.

    • @Majestic Hotwings yep I saw immediate improvement in my aim when I started going in a straight line while launching torps. It didn’t do much for my HP pool but at least I got the occasional hit. Now I’m back to square one….

  12. “Contacting Support to compile a Bug Report is needed for collecting relevant data about the bug.” WG is calling for everyone encountering the bug to file a ticket and send a WGCheck. Those dudes are delirious.

  13. A historical ship that a lot of people are interested in… They are GOING to fuck it up

  14. I would like to see an improvement to the general anti aircraft systems and the interface used to shoot down enemy planes, Namely that there isn’t one! It doesn’t have to be anything complicated maybe even something as simple as a balanced bar similar to What you see in modern golf games when you go to take a swing. You have to balance a gaige of sometype and there is a direct correlation to the accuracy based off of how well you balance. In coming air attack you can either allow your individual gunners to take on the task of firing. Or you can take control yourself when a threat is incoming. This would introduce a small amount of skill into a mechanic that up till now doesn’t need any.

  15. Honestly, this bug feels even worse than the last one. I have a feeling the ship torpedo armament is borked because of how submarines use them.
    Just keep forcing the square peg down that round hole, WG.

  16. I’m a software engineer, and the idea that they spent multiple _months_ on QA for a single bug is ridiculous. It shouldn’t even take that long to run the ENTIRE test suite, as in every single test for every aspect of the game. The slowest, most dysfunctional team I was ever part of (as a defense contractor) still completed the entire project’s QA for each release in about six weeks.

    I’m going to go out on a limb and say they probably didn’t fix the bug in a week. Most likely they had something they _thought_ was a fix, but QA found issues and sent it back, possibly more than once. But the QA process itself taking multiple months just to verify one bugfix? I don’t believe that for one second. If it is true….that doesn’t say good things about their QA competence.

    Edit: I should clarify. QA can easily stretch months, but _not_ because it takes that long to verify stuff. It takes that long when stuff has to be fixed repeatedly forcing QA to re-run the same tests over and over again with delays in between waiting on the devs to submit a new fix. But WG says they fixed it in a week and then spent months verifying the fix, _not_ that they spent months trying to figure out how to fix it. That’s why I don’t believe them, two months just to verify one change is not reasonable.

    It’s also possible that they don’t do proper version control, so they were forced to deal with other changes mixed in with the fix. But again, that leads straight back to incompetence, so that’s not an excuse.

    • There is the original bug’s question– how long did you QA that change before adding it, F*d that up, and we’re these the same people QA testing the fix? How ancient is the hardware testing on? What are the odds these are hacked Windows versions that doesn’t have current drivers (since these are Russian programmers and last MS release had less than 30% valid Win versions in that country) and would cause small issues like this. Where are the programming documentation for the fix? Should make it a quicker fix and mid point release. Sloppy all around work.

    • Agree with this.
      I work as a “solution architect” (a fancy title for the dude who details long term requirements to guide software design decisions). Any bug in a piece of software is code related. By definition. So saying it took longer because it was code related is either an oversimplification for public messaging purposes, or a really bad excuse.
      On top of that, releasing a “fix” that resulted in a new bug is normally the result of a problem with the QA process, or a problem with the classification of severity/priority of the new issue that was introduced with the “fix”. I.e.: they knew the fix introduced a shiny new issue but deemed it more acceptable than the previous problem.

      Version control is the most likely culprit I reckon.
      High pressure environment to get new content developed and bug fixes finished, unit tested, through QA and checked in before the release build is finalised often leads to late check-ins that aren’t properly managed or tested.

  17. Maybe he meant 40% rate of getting at least one hit in a torpedo salvo? That’s how I took it, because landing 40% of the torps in a salvo on average seemed pretty impossible, like you suggest.

  18. Nobody can get a 40% torp hit ratio. He must have meant something else.

  19. Wait WG did QA pass on this? How?!
    Thought they got rid of their entrie QA department aka white mouse LUL

  20. Getting wave action on ships is awesome. Players going to get sea sick.

  21. They really should rename “ranked” to “live test server”. What an absolute joke of a mode it has become.

  22. Sea Lord Mountbatten

    @Output Coupler Yes that is what I meant. Overall torp hit % is somewhere around 15%-20% on average for more experienced players in DDs.

Leave a Reply

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