Hello fellow redditors,
caught quite by surprise Sub_Octavian organized a Live QnA. And judging by the number of comments ... I got some work ahead of me. As always, the "Q" provides a link to the comment chain of the adjacent question. Starting web radio.
Could we get a % damage dealt stat in the postbattle screen? Or maybe in-match as well? And the API as well of course ;)
A: It's in our backlog, and thanks for the reminder. I will refresh the discussion in the team :)
Now that IJN AA was further nerfed with the CV/AA Overhaul, can Atago finally get her missing AA, as well as an updated superstructure to match her actual hull?
A: Missing AA? Atago plane kills score is surpassed by only Baltimore, Cleveland, Kutuzov and Wichita, and only by 1-1,4 frags on average, while all other combat stats are absolutely decent. Pre-rework she was roughly in the same spot, and I don't recall her being strongest AA ship on T8. Sorry, there is no justification for buffs at the moment. As for model improvements, we normally do this for older models from time to time, if there are better references and free resources. If there is room for improvement, she will get them some day.
Will WoWs ever get the same treatment WoT did in regards to graphics, performance, and optimization?
A: I think I commented on it a few times. We do not plan to make any complete and total tech overhaul in one huge updates. We do incremental changes. Some FX improvements here, sound improvements there, x64 client there, etc, etc. For now, there is no plan to change it approach. We will update visual, tech and under the hood part from time to time. Your question is valid and good, but for the future, I want to clarify: WoT and WoWS are different teams, studios and even before WoT engine changed, our common engine versions were very different. There is almost zero point in connecting this games from this point of view.
Given the feedback from the testing, what is your opinion of the concept of the Pobeda/Slava? A lot of people don't seem to like a ship that promotes a very passive, sniping playstyle.
A: It's a WIP ship; pretty soon her testing will be stopped, then feedback and data will be studied and then GD will decide what to do with her for then next test stage. With most obvious options being: to continue with the same concept, but change it to be bettemore balanced/better perceived or to try different concept.
Speaking about my personal opinion. I've been hearing "it promotes passive playstyle" all the time, about everything, for years. Anything people don't like, they slap this "passive gameplay" marker on. In reality, it usually does not affect anything a lot. Campers continue to camp, pushers push. But this time I actually 100% agree with your evaluation. It is a true glass sniper cannon. Yamato and Montana can be very good at long range, too, but unlike Slava, they are not useless in CQC and can push.
What is the status on the gun fire bloom change?
A: Same, in dev queue. Unfortunately, it's a game logic component, so it's in the same bin with, like, Priority sector rework or CV autopilot improvements. We will get there, but we're not ready to increase the priority of this feature to emergency (aka drop everything else and do it ASAP), because, at the time all this gun bloom changes were happening, it was obvious (after several weeks) that the impact is really low. For sure, there IS impact, in some particular cases it can be a game changer, and no denying that we're bringing this back as we promised. But right now, other things are just more important and cover much more players. TLDR - Work in progress, sorry for taking so long, will be done as promised.
Are there any plans to adjust the German battleships?, there are multiple different small changes that could be implemented to make them relevant again. They are fun ships but simply not working in the current meta.
A: I cannot back the opinion that German BB are "not working". If we look at different stats, German BB are in the middle of the group on each tier in terms of WR. They may not have stellar absolute avg. damage, but they're contributing to the team success well enough. Their popularity is also very high, even with all other options which are in the game.
There are a few additional factors, though:
- Meta changes indeed, and so does feelings and gameplay experience. I am not arguing that German BB gameplay may feel different, most likely, it does (for me personally - no, but again, I appreciate other opinions).
- There are quite a few strong premium/coal/freeXP BB on almost every tier, and a lot of skilled players stick to them. E.g Missouri, Musashi and JB are very solid, very popular, and a lot of good players use them for farm regularly. When such ships are in the group, other ships can feel weaker.
All in all, we're not opposed to improve German BB experience while staying within balance. Right now RU BB are being introduced, and they occupy the same slot of CQC BB. Let's see how their stats settle, how they shake down with German BB and then we will address this question one more time. If there is room for improvements, I don't see any single reason not to give them love. Also, I'm a fan of secondary build BBs, so...you can be sure I will be the first to vouch for that :)
Is WG happy with the effect that CV has on Tier 8 matchmaking? T8 ships are helpless against T10 aircraft, and T8 aircraft are helpless against T10 AA. This is punishing for surface ships and CV alike when being bottom tier in a T8 boat is bad enough already.
A: T8 vs T10 MM situation is roughly the same regardless of the class. As stated before, some global MM improvements are being worked on, and no CV-specific changes are currently planned. We want to improve the experience for T8 in general, for all classes.
Could we ever get a soft-cap for only 1 CV per match like you did for T10 but for all tiers or was it the intention from the start to have at least 2 CVs in a match? Maybe a slightly changed cap for 1 minute or so instead of 3. Bottom tier in a double CV game feel really frustrating, not to say about the amount of spotting they can do.
A: We're not against soft cap for 1 CV on T8 in the same way it's implemented for T10. The problem is T8 CV popularity. We update the data from time to time, and overall, when it becomes viable, we will strongly consider doing this cap. Right now it's not going to work, and I actually did a long post about it here: https://www.reddit.com/WorldOfWarships/comments/b62cx7/just_a_small_clarification_on_mm_cv_limits/
What happend to Viribus Unitis, Yahagi and Leone?
A: I mean some ships are just being put aside for some time, until there is a good moment to release them. It's fine, not all WIP content is scheduled to be release immediately after testing.
Are there any plans to update the Gearing’s model? Currently, it’s proportionally wrong and quite a bit wider than it should be (it should have the same width as a Sumner like the Yueyang).
A: We will update old models from time to time, as we recently did with Yamato.
Do you think AP bomb mechanic in general (not just Graf which is already being tested) needs to be changed and explained better as well? Currently its behavior is too extreme and difficult to predict imo. It either deals 15-25k citadel damage which is super frustrating to the receiving side or deals 2-3k overpen damage which is meh from the CV player view. There is also no baseline stat to compare the penetration number of each kind of AP bombs either, unlike HE bombs which is a fixed number.
A: No. We're quite happy with the current base mechanic, and think that it has good skill / reward ratio. What we're concerned about is AP alpha strike potential on some CV, especially while the general playerbase progresses in terms of skill and learns how to use this armament properly. So there may be some, most likely minor, tweaks in future. But the base concept itself, in our opinion, works well.
Q: Is WG happy with the amount of spotting and the more and more reduced value of concealment in the game?
Same question, only longer:
In the days of old with few/no CVs/RadaHydro concealment was very very powerful and a tool that good players could use to play with for interesting and often tense results.
CV related part:
That may not be obvious, but the planned 0.8.4 changes, which, basically, affect the squadron speed WILL influence spotting. And for us, these changes are targeted at dpm and spotting equally. The takeoff delay will affect initial spotting, which we do consider a problem as well.
We cannot promise that it will be enough, but:
- I can absolutely confirm that in any case, there is new meta, where there IS more spotting overall. We do not consider it a bad thing.
- While working on this issue further, we will try hard to use tweaks, not reworking the mechanic. Which means that options like "CV only spots for itself" and "CV spotting has delay like Radar" are not viable for us at the moment, and we will consider them only if absolutely necessary (everything else won't work).
Overall spotting part:
All factors combined, we are concerned about spotting in the game. We're fine with meta changing, but would like to keep it soft, when possible. Right now we're concentrated on CV part, as obviously CV rework had big and immediate effect, when we're fully happy with it, we will look at everything else.
Can you give us a penetration value of AP bombs? It's really interesting to know. Thanks.
Hosho (Type 99 25 Mod1): 174
Ruyjo (Type 3 25 Mod1 Mk4): 228
Shokaku (Type 2 50 Mark1): 262
Hakuryu (Type 2 80 Mk5 Mod1): 351
Enterprise (M62): 244
GZ (PD 500): 334 (pre buff)
These should be the base values. Please take this into account:
- Penetration capability is always the same, it's not affected by anything.
- However, bombs interact with effective armor, so angle matters and they even can bounce.
- They have normalization. It's base value is bigger than AP shells, but it's applied non-linearly; if the angle is bad, even great normalization won't help.
- Aircraft angle and speed affect bomb speed and trajectory (but bombs do not loose penetration from speed!). Which means that for maximum penetration capabilities we must make the drop as close to 90 degrees as possible -> dropping early. For soft targets it may make sense to drop lately because, as with AP shells, for soft targets you don't want overpens and increasing effective armor turns into a benefit.
Are there any plans to add a german coal or steel ship to the armory in the near future?
A: There are always plans to add ships of all nations and all tiers to the game for all currencies. But in Q&A, we do not make such announcements, sorry. The only thing I can say there are some cool German ships planned for the foreseeable future and I look forward to them myself :-) But that's true for other game nations as well.
Has there been any thought given toward allowing 19 pt captains to further specialize in skills(picked by the player) much the same way the special coal/doubloon captains do now? To clarify I mean skills, not special traits that activate when certain conditions are met.
A: Captains "meta" is something we may want to update in the future, but from all "meta" things at the moment, we have higher priorities.
Are there any plans to address the (imho) imbalance between the volume of almost non-stop damage over time ships have to deal with since the CV rework and the very limited (few heals and repair parties with long cooldowns) possibilities a player has to counter DOT damage, given the fact that surface ships can not disengage against a CV like they could against any surface ship (stop shooting to reduce spotting range, take cover, move away) ?
A: Overall CV balancing and AA improvements will affect his anyways. Less plane speed + better AA counterplay = less strikes = less hits = less damage, including DoT. It does not make any sense to do your proposed change until 0.8.4 and further planned changes are made and do their impact.
Also, their damage structure is not so DoT-reliant as you may think. Torps have very nerfed flooding chance, rockets are not stellar either. T10 CV atm have roughly 6% of flooding and 13,5% of fires in their damage structure, and that's the highest value of the class. T10 cruisers do 21% in fires alone.
Regarding AA, would you consider the outcome of this clip to be working as intended? It’s a 20 second clip, just an Atlanta with DFAA vs Tier 6 torpedo bombers.Without giving too much away, would the future planned changes to AA change this interaction in a meaningful way?
A: We're happy with Atlanta herself. From all non CV ships in the game, Atlanta avg plane kills are surpassed only by Minotaur,Worcester and a couple of USN BB. Relatively to the game, Atlanta has an amazing AA.
However, we're not entirely happy about CV-AA interaction globally, especially in regards to priority sector. We want the combination of AA ship/build + skillful priority sector usage to have noticeably more impact on ship's AA defence, and that's what we're working on right now.
Are there any plans on making secondaries more viable as a build?
We now have a pair of US ships that show that a good build can be fun but that's about it. ManSecs is a waste of 4 points for 99% of ships. Between a T9 BB having 5km guns and the Vanguard having the wrong ones it seems to be an area that's been mostly overlooked.
A: Yes. But it is not simple. I doubt we will make significant changes with current settings, and new secondary mechanics obviously will be a long term project, given other things being worked on. I can say this: we want to do something cool with secondaries, but there is no final decision what and when yet. At the moment we do not treat " secondaries being a fun alternative for just a couple of ship lines " an emergency. It is an area of the game we will eventually revisit, along with many others.
I have a question regarding Catapult Fighter
consumables. As of now, they seem rather slow to actually attack enemy aircrafts, and also, the full squadron is depleted even when they shoot down a nearly used-up squadron consisting of, say, 2 aircrafts. Is WG happy with the current efficiency of Catapult fighters? Any tweaks to make players feel more protected when using the consumable?
A: Yes, we're happy with the efficiency of this consumable. It does what it was meant to - inflicts losses on enemy squadron or, in some cases, creates area denial. It's more efficient when launched with good timing, it's less efficient when launched late. It's more efficient if CV plays aggressively, it's less efficient if CV plays carefully. TBH, we're fine with its state right now, and our nearest efforts to improve AA protection will be targeted at priority sector mechanic, not at fighters.
What is WG's opinion on presence of skill gap between players in current reworked CVs? I have personally seen fails in current CVs worse than anything I have ever encountered in old CVs.
A: The presence of skill gap is not a problem (good players should be rewarded, bad players should be punished), the question is in the "width" of this gap, and it's effect on the game: on player's personal performance and on the team. Pre rework CV were very different in this aspect from everybody else. And in this aspect, with all data we have, we don't have any doubts that new CV are much much better than old CV.
While I understand specific changes to a module and/or system would be reserved for the Dev Blog, can you update us on the plans for the system as a whole? Approximate timing of the change?
The number of new T10 ships is continually increasing thus the inventory of ships with and without Legendary Modules grows. Would premium ships ever have a Legendary Module opportunity? What about CV’s?
A: That's not about getting in trouble :) As I've hinted a few times, we're at the design stage. It may be completely new system, or complementing system or just "keep these mods and do more of them". Right now there is truly no answer, and the decision is in the process.
Any chance for a setting to disable the in-game chat (apart from system messages like consumable use and the wheel messages)?
A: It's being discussed right now actually, as there are quite a few requests to do it from the players. We will let you know when the decision is made, of course.
Right now CVs feel very removed from the gameplayloop. A lot of the time as a surface player i feel like just a target / NPC for the damage race between the two CVs. This is made worse by there being basically no interaction between CVs. Fighters are buggy as hell and usually just cancel each other out.
- We want to add more counterplay, as stated several times in thisn QnA. Please check out my replies about Priority sector.
- Fighter cancelling each other is exactly what we want. If you have a fighter ready you can try to cancel enemy fighter. Also, we don't want them to be "press the button to wipe the enemy out immediately". For now we see that they work as they should.
- I play the same game, regularly, on various ships classes and tiers. Sorry, but I feel you are blowing this out of proportion. Some issues? Sure. NPC mode? Eh, no, and it is not backed by stats either. CV damage increase with player skill is relarively higher than on other classes, but WR increase is lower. CV as a class influence battle outcome less than other classes and much less than they used to. Also, please read about new AA mechanic. Auras deal very consistent damage. They were much more RNG pre rework.
What are the alternative ways for players to acquire the Admiral Kuznetsov captain after the Victory event? Will there be a permanent campaign for Kuznetsov similar to the campaigns for Yamamoto and Halsey? Given that Kuznetsov has abilities that give a significant advantage over a standard captain, if players who miss out on the campaign cannot get him later on, they would be significantly disadvantaged during combat.
A: It's WIP, but according to the current plan, there will be means to get this commander afterwards, however, not immediately after the event. For exactly the reasons you state: we don't want newer players to miss out good content. What it will be (a campaign? an armory item?) - I cannot confirm now.
Has there been any updates regarding linux players getting warnings and potentially banned?, I know you guys aren't officially supporting linux but the game runs perfectly under wine it's just the warning system causing issues since the last update.
A: We're looking into it, but unfortunately, as Linux is NOT officially supported, I cannot give any guarantees. Sorry :(
Is there a possibility of another captain skill rework. I feel that AA skills should be separated from secondary skills currently as both suffer from their meh performance together and their significant investment away from skills that increase survivability and/or captain skills that increase comfortability.
A: Some updates are more than possible in foreseeable future. Complete rework - highly unlikely this year or even beyond.
I know that balancing is cyclical, and that you're actively working on spotting and CV balance in general (thanks!), but my question is on the DD side of the equation: Are you seeing as significant of an affect on DD's as a class since rework as the population of DD mains is claiming?
A: DD popularity has decreased of course (what's interesting quite a few DD players have become very active with CV). It is on acceptable level, and to be honest, I don't think it's something very special. We had a lot of popularity fluctuations over the years - at some point BB were over dominating and cruisers were nearly obsolete, and even before thet DD were on top. Right now the class distribution is okay (cruisers did big comeback btw), and with a few changes to CV, most likely, DD and CV populations will bounce back a bit more (more DD less CV).
As for DD efficiency, it's definitely fine stats-wise, but we fully understand subjective, situational factor. Hence the upcoming changes to HE bombs for example, the already done nerfs to the rockets, etc, etc.
Balance is cynical, but numbers is not the only thing we care about. Sentiment has huge weight too, and the biggest challenge is to balance these things before balancing the ships :-)
Are there plans to introduce similar things for the AP shells ? Say at 5,10 and 15km where applicable ? That would be extremely useful for certain ships in deciding whether to use AP or not.
A: Not a priority, as unfortunately, AP shells loose penetration with distance non linearly, they have different trajectories, hit at different angles, and normalize. We're not fans of adding super hardcore information to the client, which the bulk of playerbase will never use. On the other hand, adding this information in interactive and digestible form so it actually helps players to make decisions, is a big task. A good one, but very costly. So it sits in back log for now.
Do you think that the binary nature of HE penetration is a problem when it comes to balancing skills like IFHE and small-caliber guns, or do you guys think that its fine and you can balance it regardless?
A: I do not comment on leaks and speculations ;) But answering the main part, we think that core mechanics of HE is fine, and with 99% probability any further improvements will be "tweaking the knobs" rather then "2020 year of HE rework".
Has the dev team considered "changing/nerfing" IFHE by buffing the consistency of small caliber AP a small amount (like lower arming threshold, OR slightly better normalization, OR slightly better bounce angles, etc.) in order to create a competitor to IFHE?
A: Yes, along with many other options, but there is no direction that we're firmly believe in just yet.
Are there any new operations in development?
A: Apart from some..interesting special events - no. Our efforts in terms of game modes will be concentrated more on enriching PvP and making cool events this year.
Is there any chance to increase the punishment for afk and bot at asia server? Since the chinese server stopped update and remained at 0.7.3. There are many players from Chinese server moved to Asia server since last year. Bots are everywhere, You can meet at least 1 bot or afk players per team per match. Situation are even worse at low Tier during morning and midnight server time. It is just not fun to play with such numbers of bot and player who fire once every 5 mins.
A: Yes. And not only for Asia. Actually, we're readdressing our system right now to better detect and better suspend the accounts which looks like "bots". Whether they are bots or just zero-effort farm accounts played by 10 ppl, is not relevant - we know they ruin the experience for fair players. So there will be improvements here in the near future.
Are there any plans to introduce a game mode without carriers anytime soon?
A: No (apart from various events, that can be "no CV", "no BB" and "no whatever class, because it's an event").
Any plans on completely rebalancing Graf Zeppelin, now that its biggest weapon --- speed --- has been nerfed 40 knots? Any plans for further AA/CV balance that you can share at the moment?
A: Question 1: no, the speed boost mechanics is being changed globally and systematically. It's not a GZ nerf, it's a global mechanics nerf affecting all CV in the game. In the meantime, GZ retains her individual quality - high speed, with DB and TB planes having 181kt of base speed while other CV at this tier have it in 130ish range. What's more, her DB are being buffed. Better accuracy, more comfortable attack and, what's IMO even more important, higher bomb speed and penetration. The numbers do not seem huge, but in game it can be a difference between penetrating or not penetrating armor deck, especially against higher tier ships. And we all know that citadel hit is very desirable when you use AP bombs. If GZ will be weak after the changes for some reason, she will be improved in some other way - that's a standard workflow.
Question 2: everything we can share ATM is in Dev Blog.
Special commander Kutznetov has a much less specialised (ship reaches <10% HP) special ability activation threshold. This was because Yamamoto and Halsey’s were considered too specific (score a kraken, ect.).
With this in mind, will there be a revision of Halsey and Yamamoto’s special ability threshold?
Is this activation threshold something we could see in future special commanders of other nations?
A: The idea is that we want to try slightly different concept.
Right now we have guys like Doe Brothers (no super talents, improved skills), Epic Yamamoto and Halsey ( improved skills, super rare and super epic talents), and now we want to try Kuznetsov as "less improved skills, less epic, but easier to trigger talents".
Right now we're not 100% sure of the further developments. But if Kuznetsov is successful, I'm pretty sure there will be more commanders like that for other game nations. At the same time Yamamoto and Halsey future in this case is an open question. Should they be reworked, removing their mega epic effect in favor of less good/easier to trigger? Or should we get the alt.versions? Or maybe all 3 types of commanders will co-exist to suits different tastes :-) We will see.
Have you considered making AA rewarding or at least the investment for AA specs less costly?
It requires a substantial investment to specialise any ship for AA, yet there is next to no control.
A: Yes, and that's kinda in the plan. To reward more for AA control and/or AA loadout. Without making ships like Mino into "I evaporate you in a second before you even notice", preferably.
: Will the Yueyang ever be rebalanced to account for the unnecessary nerfs a few patches ago?
A: As any other ship, YY can be changed in the future, but we do not consider the nerf "unnecessary", happy with the result, and there is no reverting planned. YY sits firmly in the middle of T10 DD in terms of damage, WR, frags and other stats. At the same time, YY audience skill curve is not special (as opposed to Daring for example), so her relative performance is also fine. She's the least popular T10 DD, but always was like this, and her popularity is still acceptable to us. She used to be OP, now she's OK. Can it be "more OK" (better) while staying within acceptable balance? Yes, as many other ships, too. So we will consider it for the future updates.
- Citadels that are small in size and are placed in the stern. In the case of the Enterprise almost none existent.
- Automatic fire and flood control damage
- High resistance to fire and flooding
- The automatic movement control moves the CV in reverse. This has the effect of not exposing a citadel that is already hard to get to.
What is the rationale for these design features?
- Citadels in the game are being defined according to a specific set of rules. CV citadels follow this set as well, and their citadel placement has nothing to do with rework. From what I see in game and in stats, they can be easily citadeled in most cases.
- Already explained long time ago in DevBlog.
When will the Midway and Hakuryu get their Legendary Module back? They got frozen after 0.8.0 and currently cannot be used (although they can be earned).
Personaly I would love to see the Midway get its old jets back from the Closed Beta when the Legendary Upgrade gets mounted. Dont know how it should balanced, but it would be cool to look at nonetheless
A: I'm not 100% sure they will, actually. Because in our plans, we want to readdress the Legendary Mod thing overall. Maybe there will be some other system instead. Or maybe there will be changes. There is no exact decision right now; it may turn out that these mods will appear in some time as a part of current system, or they may be replaced (for all ships) with something completely new. Or these systems will co-exist. Sorry, in all fairness, we don't know ourselves right now :-)
In about another 6-8 months, when it is finally admitted that the CV rework has failed, how will WG attempt to repair the damage done?
A: While "never say never" is true (looks at Halloween subs
), we don't have any indication that CV rework is a failure. It has some issues, part of which are still to be resolved, it has some negative constructive feedback, and, sorry to say that, I mean no disrespect, it also has some echo-chamber hatred sentiment, which is not really constructive, too.
As you can guess, no developer is interested in making the game worse, less popular, less enjoyable, etc. WoWS is the result for our effort, it's main career project for most of us, and it's huge part of our lives. From all main audience metrics, overall results of CV rework are good. From balance metrics, CV rework is good. Some players being unhappy or salty is of course NOT good, but:
- We're addressing the players concerns, and working on feedback points.
- We had the gut to rework the class from scratch, and none of us had pink dreams that CV rework would suit absolutely everyone.
If you disagree, fine, everyone is entitled to own opinion. And I apologize if the game is worse for you as a result of out efforts to make it better. Obviously none of us can be happy about it. But in all honesty, I am not going to admit something I don't believe in, while the full picture looks good and the game is alive and kicking. Even if this sub has turned into CV hate fest for some players, when many positive opinions are actively mocked and downvoted.
My clan is one of the top Naval Battle clans in the world. We set the pre-damage star record with 164 stars and put up 245 last week. We have really enjoyed the game mode and how it brings the clan together.
However, the change to damage from base XP had a HUGE side effect last weekend. A strategy I saw was to div in a co-op game with two other players and have them not fire their guns until the player going for the star gets their damage. This makes what was a fun game mode very boring, especially when more players take advantage of this. Can WG either to go back to base XP or only allow Naval Battles to be done in randoms? Thank you.
A: Feedback appreciated, most likely we will get to XP and think about damage more.
Will there ever be high tier operations It would give me great feels to play operation Ten Go as Yamato/Musashi at Leyte or something with Missouri
A: Unfortunately our current efforts are mostly switched to PvP maps and modes, and to thematic events. For now, we're not able to spend any significant resources on Operations, simply because there are things much bigger chunk of playerbase cares about.
Kinda two questions stuffed in one, but. Will there ever be considered doing a BB line split for RN and KM, for Battlecruisers? Having vessels like HMS Renown would be awesome.
A: There is no reason for not adding new interesting lines, but I am not announcing them on QnA ;)
That went quicker than I thought! As always, I have omitted super obvious questions that result in a "This is confidential" answer. Also: If I have forogotten any important question OR a link is broken, let me know.
Background reading submitted by
How does Emergent Coding prevent developer capture?
- https://youtu.be/-MMQUspVduo ELI5 with pictures.
- https://youtu.be/ZSkZxOJ5HPA Hello World using Emergent Coding
- https://codevalley.com/whitepaper.pdf This document treats Emergent coding from a philosophical perspective. It has a good introduction, description of the tech and is followed by two sections on justifications from the perspective of Fred Brooks No Silver Bullet criteria and an industrialization criteria.
- Mark Fabbro's presentation from the Bitcoin Cash City Conference which outlines the motivation, basic mechanics, and usage of Bitcoin Cash in reproducing the industrial revolution in the software industry.
- Building the Bitcoin Cash City presentation highlighting how the emergent coding group of companies fit into the adoption roadmap of North Queensland.
- Forging Chain Metal by Paul Chandler CEO of Aptissio, one of startups in the emergent coding space and which secured a million in seed funding last year.
- Bitcoin Cash App Exploration A series of Apps that are some of the first to be built by emergent coding and presented, and in the case of Cashbar, demonstrated at the conference.
- A casual Bitcoin Cash interview that touches on emergent coding, tech park, merchant adoption and much more.
A developer's Agent does not know what project they are contributing to and is thus paid for the specific contribution. The developer is controlling the terms of the payment rather than the alternative, an employer with an employment agreement. Why does Emergent Coding use Bitcoin BCH?
- Both emergent coding and Bitcoin BCH are decentralized: As emergent coding is a decentralized development environment consisting of Agents providing respective design services, each contract received by an agent requires a BCH payment. As Agents are hosted by their developer owners which may be residing in one of 150 countries, Bitcoin Cash - an electronic peer-to-peer electronic cash system - is ideal to include a developer regardless of geographic location.
- Emergent coding will increase the value of the Bitcoin BCH blockchain: With EC, there are typically many contracts to build an application (Cashbar was designed with 10000 contracts or so). EC adoption will increase the value of the Bitcoin BCH blockchain in line with this influx of quality economic activity.
- Emergent coding is being applied to BCH software first: One of the first market verticals being addressed with emergent coding is Bitcoin Cash infrastructure. We are already seeing quality applications created using emergent coding (such as the HULA, Cashbar, PH2, vending, ATMs etc). More apps and tools supporting Bitcoin cash will attract more merchants and business to BCH.
- Emergent coding increases productivity: Emergent coding increases developer productivity and reduces duplication compared to other software development methods. Emergent coding can provide BCH devs with an advantage over other coins. A BCH dev productivity advantage will accelerate Bitcoin BCH becoming the first global currency.
- Emergent coding produces higher quality binaries: Higher quality software leads to a more reliable network.
1. Who/what is Code Valley? Aptissio? BCH Tech Park? Mining and Server Complex? Code Valley Corp Pty Ltd
is the company founded to commercialize emergent coding technology. Code Valley is incorporated in North Queensland, Australia. See https://codevalley.com Aptissio Australia Pty Ltd
is a company founded in North Queensland and an early adopter of emergent coding. Aptissio is applying EC to Bitcoin BCH software. See https://www.aptissio.com Townsville Technology Precincts Pty Ltd
(TTP) was founded to bring together partners to answer the tender for the Historic North Rail Yard Redevelopment in Townsville, North Queensland. The partners consist of P+I, Conrad Gargett, HF Consulting, and a self-managed superannuation fund(SMSF) with Code Valley Corp Pty Ltd expected to be signed as an anchor tenant. TTP answered a Townsville City Council (TCC) tender with a proposal for a AUD$53m project (stage 1) to turn the yards into a technology park and subsequently won the tender. The plan calls for the bulk of the money is to be raised in the Australian equity markets with the city contributing $28% for remediation of the site and just under 10% from the SMSF. Construction is scheduled to begin in mid 2020 and be competed two years later. Townsville Mining Pty Ltd
was set up to develop a Server Complex in the Kennedy Energy Park in North Queensland. The site has undergone several studies as part of a due diligence process with encouraging results for its competitiveness in terms of real estate, power, cooling and data.
2. What programming language are the "software agents" written in.
- TM are presently in negotiations with the owners of the site and is presently operating under an NDA.
- The business model calls for leasing "sectors" to mining companies that wish to mine allowing companies to control their own direction.
- Since Emergent Coding uses the BCH rail, TM is seeking to contribute to BCH security with an element of domestic mining.
- TM are working with American partners to lease one of the sectors to meet that domestic objective.
- The site will also host Emergent Coding Agents and Code Valley and its development partners are expected to lease several of these sectors.
- TM hopes to have the site operational within 2 years.
Agents are "built" using emergent coding. You select the features you want your Agent to have and send out the contracts. In a few minutes you are in possession of a binary ELF. You run up your ELF on your own machine and it will peer with the emergent coding and Bitcoin Cash networks. Congratulations, your Agent is now ready to accept its first contract. 3. Who controls these "agents" in a software project
You control your own Agents. It is a decentralized development system. 4. What is the software license of these agents. Full EULA here, now.
A license gives you the right to create your own Agents and participate in the decentralized development system. We will publish the EULA when we release the product. 5. What kind of software architecture do these agents have. Daemons Responding to API calls ? Background daemons that make remote connection to listening applications?
Your Agent is a server that requires you to open a couple of ports so as to peer with both EC and BCH networks. If you run a BCH full node you will be familiar with this process. Your Agent will create a "job" for each contract it receives and is designed to operate thousands of jobs simultaneously in various stages of completion. It is your responsibility to manage your Agent and keep it open for business or risk losing market share to another developer capable of designing the same feature in a more reliable manner (or at better cost, less resource usage, faster design time etc.). For example, there is competition at every classification which is one reason emergent coding is on a fast path for improvement.
It is worth reiterating here that Agents are only used in the software design process and do not perform any role in the returned project binary. 6. What is the communication protocol these agents use.
The protocol is proprietary and is part of your license. 7. Are the agents patented? Who can use these agents?
It is up to you if you want to patent your Agent the underlying innovation behind emergent coding is _feasible_ developer specialization. Emergent coding gives you the ability to contribute to a project without revealing your intellectual property thus creating prospects for repeat business; It renders software patents moot.
Who uses your Agents? Your Agents earn you BCH with each design contribution made. It would be wise to have your Agent open for business at all times and encourage everyone to use your design service. 8. Do I need to cooperate with Code Valley company all of the time in order to deploy Emergent Coding on my software projects, or can I do it myself, using documentation?
It is a decentralized system. There is no single point of failure. Code Valley intends to defend the emergent coding ecosystem from abuse and bad actors but that role is not on your critical path. 9. Let's say Electron Cash is an Emergent Coding project. I have found a critical bug in the binary. How do I report this bug, what does Jonald Fyookball need to do, assuming the buggy component is a "shared component" puled from EC "repositories"?
If you built Electron Cash with emergent coding it will have been created by combining several high level wallet features designed into your project by their respective Agents. Obviously behind the scenes there are many more contracts that these Agents will let and so on. For example the Cashbar combines just 16 high level Point-of-Sale features but ultimately results in more than 10,000 contracts in toto. Should one of these 10,000 make a design error, Jonald only sees the high level Agents he contracted. He can easily pinpoint which of these contractors are in breach. Similarly this contractor can easily pinpoint which of its sub-contractors is in breach and so on. The offender that breached their contract wherever in the project they made their contribution, is easily identified. For example, when my truck has a warranty problem, I do not contact the supplier of the faulty big-end bearing, I simply take it back to Mazda who in turn will locate the fault.
Finally "...assuming the buggy component is a 'shared component' puled from EC 'repositories'?
" - There are no repositories or "shared component" in emergent coding. 10. What is your licensing/pricing model? Per project? Per developer? Per machine?
Your Agent charges for each design contribution it makes (ie per contract). The exact fee is up to you. The resulting software produced by EC is unencumbered. Code Valley's pricing model consists of a seat license but while we are still determining the exact policy, we feel the "Valley" (where Agents advertise their wares) should charge a small fee to help prevent gaming the catalogue and a transaction fee to provide an income in proportion to operations. 11. What is the basic set of applications I need in order to deploy full Emergent Coding in my software project? What is the function of each application? Daemons, clients, APIs, Frontends, GUIs, Operating systems, Databases, NoSQLs? A lot of details, please.
There's just one. You buy a license and are issued with our product called Pilot. You run Pilot (node) up on your machine and it will peer with the EC and BCH networks. You connect your browser to Pilot typically via localhost and you're in business. You can build software (including special kinds of software like Agents) by simply combining available features. Pilot allows you to specify the desired features and will manage the contracts and decentralized build process. It also gives you access to the "Valley" which is a decentralized advertising site that contains all the "business cards" of each Agent in the community, classified into categories for easy search.
If we are to make a step change in software design, inventing yet another HLL will not cut it. As Fred Brooks puts it, an essential change
is needed. 12. How can I trust a binary when I can not see the source?
The Emergent Coding development model is very different to what you are use to. There are ways of arriving at a binary without Source code.
The Agents in emergent coding design their feature into your project without writing code. We can see the features we select but can not demonstrate the source as the design process doesn't use a HLL.
The trust model is also different. The bulk of the testing happens _before_ the project is designed not _after_. Emergent Coding produces a binary with very high integrity and arguably far more testing is done in emergent coding than in incumbent methods you are used to.
In emergent coding, your reputation is built upon the performance of your Agent.
If your Agent produces substandard features, you are simply creating an opportunity for a competitor to increase their market share at your expense.
Here are some points worth noting regarding bad actor Agents:
- An Agent is a specialist and in emergent coding is unaware of the project they are contributing to. If you are a bad actor, do you compromise every contract you receive? Some? None?
- Your client is relying on the quality of your contribution to maintain their own reputation. Long before any client will trust your contributions, they will have tested you to ensure the quality is at their required level. You have to be at the top of your game in your classification to even win business. This isn't some shmuck pulling your routine from a library.
- Each contract to your agent is provisioned. Ie you advertise in advance what collaborations you require to complete your design. There is no opportunity for a "sign a Bitcoin transaction" Agent to be requesting "send an HTTP request" collaborations.
- Your Agent never gets to modify code, it makes a design contribution rather than a code contribution. There is no opportunity to inject anything as the mechanism that causes the code to emerge is a higher order complexity of all Agent involvement.
- There is near perfect accountability in emergent coding. You are being contracted and paid to do the design. Every project you compromise has an arrow pointed straight at you should it be detected even years later.
Security is a whole other ball game in emergent coding and current rules do not necessarily apply. 13. Every time someone rebuilds their application, do they have to pay over again for all "design contributions"? (Or is the ability to license components at fixed single price for at least a limited period or even perpetually, supported by the construction (agent) process?)
You are paying for the design. Every time you build (or rebuild) an application, you pay the developers involved. They do not know they are "rebuilding". This sounds dire but its costs far less than you think and there are many advantages. Automation is very high with emergent coding so software design is completed for a fraction of the cost of incumbent design methods. You could perhaps rebuild many time before matching incumbent methods. Adding features is hard with incumbent methods "..very few late-stage additions are required before the code base transforms from the familiar to a veritable monster of missed schedules, blown budgets and flawed products" (Brooks Jr 1987)
whereas with emergent coding adding a late stage feature requires a rebuild and hence seamless integration. With Emergent Coding, you can add an unlimited number of features without risking the codebase as there isn't one.
The second part of your question incorrectly assumes software is created from licensed components rather than created by paying Agents to design features into your project without any licenses involved. 14. In this construction process, is the vendor of a particular "design contribution" able to charge differential rates per their own choosing? e.g. if I wanted to charge a super-low rate to someone from a 3rd world country versus charging slightly more when someone a global multinational corporation wants to license my feature?
Yes. Developers set the price and policy of their Agent's service. The Valley (where your Agent is presently advertised) presently only supports a simple price policy. The second part of your question incorrectly assumes features are encumbered with licenses. A developer can provide their feature without revealing their intellectual property. A client has the right to reuse a developer's feature in another project but will find it uneconomical to do so. 15. Is "entirely free" a supported option during the contract negotiation for a feature?
Yes. You set the price of your Agent. 16. "There is no single point of failure." Right now, it seems one needs to register, license the construction tech etc. Is that going to change to a model where your company is not necessarily in that loop? If not, don't you think that's a single point of failure?
It is a decentralized development system. Once you have registered you become part of a peer-to-peer system. Code Valley has thought long and hard about its role and has chosen the reddit model. It will set some rules for your participation and will detect or remove bad actors. If, in your view, Code Valley becomes a bad actor, you have control over your Agent, private keys and IP, you can leave the system at any time. 17. What if I can't obtain a license because of some or other jurisdictional problem? Are you allowed to license the technology to anywhere in the world or just where your government allows it?
We are planning to operate in all 150 countries. As ec is peer-to-peer, Code Valley does not need to register as a digital currency exchange or the like. Only those countries banning BCH will miss out (until such times as BCH becomes the first global electronic cash system). 18.
For example the Cashbar combines just 16 high level Point-of-Sale features but ultimately results in more than 10,000 contracts in toto. It seems already a reasonably complex application, so well done in having that as a demo.
Thank you. 19. I asked someone else a question about how it would be possible to verify whether an application (let's say one received a binary executable) has been built with your system of emergent consensus. Is this possible?
Yes of course. If you used ec to build an application, you can sign it and claim anything you like. Your client knows it came from you because of your signature. The design contributions making up the application are not signed but surprisingly there is still perfect accountability (see below). 20. I know it is possible to identify for example all source files and other metadata (like build environment) that went into constructing a binary, by storing this data inside an executable.
All metadata emergent coding is now stored offline. When your Agent completes a job, you have a log of the design agreements you made with your peers etc., as part of the log. If you are challenged at a later date for breaching a design contract, you can pull your logs to see what decisions you made, what sub-contracts were let etc. As every Agent has their own logs, the community as a whole has a completely trustless log of each project undertaken. 21. Is this being done with EC build products and would it allow the recipient to validate that what they've been provided has been built only using "design contributions" cryptographically signed by their providers and nothing else (i.e. no code that somehow crept in that isn't covered by the contracting process)?
The emergent coding trust model is very effective and has been proven in other industries. Remember, your Agent creates a feature in my project by actually combining smaller features contracted from other Agents, thus your reputation is linked to that of your suppliers. If Bosch makes a faulty relay in my Ford, I blame Ford for a faulty car not Bosch when my headlights don't work. Similarly, you must choose and vet your sub-contractors to the level of quality that you yourself want to project. Once these relationships are set up, it becomes virtually impossible for a bad actor to participate in the system for long or even from the get go. 22. A look at code generated and a surprising answer to why is every intermediate variable spilled?
Thanks to u/R_Sholes
, this snippet from the actual code for: number = number * 10 + digit
generated as a part of: sub read/integeboolean($, 0, 100) -> guess
; copy global to local temp variable 0x004032f2 movabs r15, global.current_digit 0x004032fc mov r15, qword [r15] 0x004032ff mov rax, qword [r15] 0x00403302 movabs rdi, local.digit 0x0040330c mov qword [rdi], rax ; copy global to local temp variable 0x0040330f movabs r15, global.guess 0x00403319 mov r15, qword [r15] 0x0040331c mov rax, qword [r15] 0x0040331f movabs rdi, local.num 0x00403329 mov qword [rdi], rax ; multiply local variable by constant, uses new temp variable for output 0x0040332c movabs r15, local.num 0x00403336 mov rax, qword [r15] 0x00403339 movabs rbx, 10 0x00403343 mul rbx 0x00403346 movabs rdi, local.num_times_10 0x00403350 mov qword [rdi], rax ; add local variables, uses yet another new temp variable for output 0x00403353 movabs r15, local.num_times_10 0x0040335d mov rax, qword [r15] 0x00403360 movabs r15, local.digit 0x0040336a mov rbx, qword [r15] 0x0040336d add rax, rbx 0x00403370 movabs rdi, local.num_times_10_plus_digit 0x0040337a mov qword [rdi], rax ; copy local temp variable back to global 0x0040337d movabs r15, local.num_times_10_plus_digit 0x00403387 mov rax, qword [r15] 0x0040338a movabs r15, global.guess 0x00403394 mov rdi, qword [r15] 0x00403397 mov qword [rdi], rax For comparison, an equivalent snippet in C compiled by clang without optimizations gives this output: imul rax, qword ptr [guess], 10 add rax, qword ptr [digit] mov qword ptr [guess], rax
Collaborations at the byte layer of Agents result in designs that spill every intermediate variable.
Firstly, why this is so?
Agents from this early version only support one catch-all variable design when collaborating. Similar to a compiler when all registers contain variables, the compiler must make a decision to spill a register temporarily to main memory. The compiler would still work if it spilled every variable to main memory but would produce code that would be, as above, hopelessly inefficient.
However, by only supporting the catch-all portion of the protocol, the code valley designers were able to design, build and deploy these agents faster because an Agent needs fewer predicates in order to participate in these simpler collaborations.
The protocol involved however, can have many "Policies" besides the catch-all default policy (Agents can collaborate over variables designed to be on the stack, or, as is common for intermediate variables, designed to use a CPU register, and so forth).
This example highlights one of the very exciting aspects of emergent coding. If we now add a handful of additional predicates to a handful of these byte layer agents, henceforth ALL
project binaries will be 10x smaller and 10x faster.
Finally, there can be many Agents competing for market share at each of classification. If these "gumby" agents do not improve, you can create a "smarter" competitor (ie with more predicates) and win business away from them. Candy from a baby. Competition means the smartest agents bubble to the top of every classification and puts the entire emergent coding platform on a fast path for improvement
. Contrast this with incumbent libraries which does not have a financial incentive to improve. Just wait until you get to see our production system. 23. How hard can an ADD Agent be?
Typically an Agent's feature is created by combining smaller features from other Agents. The smallest features are so devoid of context and complexity they can be rendered by designing a handful of bytes in the project binary. Below is a description of one of these "byte" layer Agents to give you an idea how they work.
An "Addition" Agent creates the feature of "adding two numbers" in your project (This is an actual Agent). That is, it contributes to the project design a feature such that when the project binary is delivered, there will be an addition instruction somewhere in it that was designed by the contract that was let to this Agent.
If you were this Agent, for each contract you received, you would need to collaborate with peers in the project to resolve vital requirements before you can proceed to design your binary "instruction".
Each paid contract your Agent receives will need to participate in at least 4 collaborations within the design project. These are:
- Input A collaboration
- Input B collaboration
- Result collaboration
- Construction site collaboration
You can see from the collaborations involved how your Agent can determine the precise details needed to design its instruction. As part of the contract, the Addition Agent will be provisioned with contact details so it can join these collaborations. Your Agent must collaborate with other stakeholders in each collaboration to resolve that requirement. In this case, how a variable will be treated. The stakeholders use a protocol to arrive at an Agreement and share the terms of the agreement. For example, the stakeholders of collaboration “Input A” may agree to treat the variable as an signed 64bit integer, resolve to locate it at location 0x4fff2, or alternatively agree that the RBX register should be used, or agree to use one of the many other ways a variable can be represented. Once each collaboration has reached an agreement and the terms of that agreement distributed, your Agent can begin to design the binary instruction. The construction site collaboration is where you will exactly place your binary bytes.
The construction site protocol is detailed in the whitepaper and is some of the magic that allows the decentralized development system to deliver the project binary. The protocol consists of 3 steps,
- You request space in the project binary be reserved.
- You are notified of the physical address of your requested space.
- You delver the the binary bytes you designed to fill the reserved space.
Once the bytes are returned your Agent can remove the job from its work schedule. Job done, payment received, another happy customer with a shiny ADD instruction designed into their project binary.
24. How does EC arrive at a project binary without writing source code?
- Observe how it is impossible for this ADD Agent to install a backdoor undetected by the client.
- Observe how the Agent isn’t linking a module, or using a HLL to express the binary instruction.
- Observe how with just a handful of predicates you have a working "Addition" Agent capable of designing the Addition Feature into a project with a wide range of collaboration agreements.
- Observe how this Agent could conceivably not even design-in an ADD instruction if one of the design time collaboration agreements was a literal "1" (It would design in an increment instruction). There is even a case where this Agent may not deliver any binary to build its feature into your project!
Devs using EC combine features to create solutions. They don't write code. EC devs contract Agents which design the desired features into their project for a fee. Emergent coding uses a domain specific contracting language (called pilot) to describe the necessary contracts. Pilot is not a general purpose language. As agents create their features by similarly combining smaller features contracted from peer, your desired features may inadvertently result in thousands of contracts. As it is agents all the way down, there is no source code to create the project binary. Traditional
: Software requirements -> write code -> compile -> project binary (ELF). Emergent coding
: Select desired features -> contract agents -> project binary (ELF).
Agents themselves are created the same way - specify the features you want your agent to have, contract the necessary agents for those features and viola - agent project binary (ELF). 25. How does the actual binary code that agents deliver to each other is written?
An agent never touches code. With emergent coding, agents contribute features to a project, and leave the project binary to emerge as the higher-order complexity of their collective effort. Typically, agents “contribute” their feature by causing smaller features to be contributed by peers, who in turn, do likewise. By mapping features to smaller features delivered by these peers, agents ensure their feature is delivered to the project without themselves making a direct code contribution.
Peer connections established by these mappings serve to both incrementally extend a temporary project “scaffold” and defer the need to render a feature as a code contribution. At the periphery of the scaffold, features are so simple they can be rendered as a binary fragment with these binary fragments using the information embodied by the scaffold to guide the concatenation back along the scaffold to emerge as the project binary - hence the term Emergent Coding.
Note the scaffold forms a temporary tree-like structure which allows virtually all the project design contracts to be completed in parallel. The scaffold also automatically limits an agent's scope to precisely the resources and site for their feature. It is why it is virtually impossible for an agent to install a "back door" or other malicious code into the project binary.
This is the proven, experienced trading team you need to finally conquer Forex, Cryptocurrency Investment, and Trading Binary Options. We have the experience, the technology, and most importantly, the WINNING STRATEGY that is producing results for our members. HourATM is United Kingdom registered company, (Company Number: #12555212,70 Marsh Wall, London, England, E14 9SL.),HourATM Is an 24/7 Forex, cryptocurrency investment & trading, binary options trading company that works automatically, and it has been registered in the UK company, we offer a no-experience trading method to help you remove Please note this Column is not applicable for Binary Options. This field is the trigger for European Digital options Please insert C for Call and P for Put. Note that this parameter is not applicable for Binary options. You must use this field for Barriers and European Digital options. For European Digital (C=Above, P=Below) Super EZ Forex has a section where the creator of superezforex.com provides answers to frequently asked questions. For now, there is only one option of a package available for the product and this costs $323.67. options for buying this via PayPal or Bitcoin is allowed. Nothing more can be found on the working principles and mechanisms of this Since 2008, investing and making money online with binary options has become increasingly attractive to investors and individuals who invest in shares, equities, currencies, and commodities. There are only two options in binary trading; hence the use of the term “binary”. It is almost like placing a bet, in that you are wagering that an asset will increase
Print My ATM track and record the performance of our students as an collective. Here is can keep up with our monthly results in regards to our Binary Options Trading strategies. Get your Winning Nadex Signals today from www.MyGoldenSignals.com To get your Nadex Super Signals!!! Contact me at [email protected] If you want to learn to become a full time Six Figure ... Get your Binary Options Trading Education today at www.MyGoldenSignals.com For more info contact me at [email protected] Here I take a look into the way I trade Nadex Binary Options in 2020 with aTM and OTM contract only. We never trade ITM options with my strategy as you are setting yourself up for mediocre results. by Super Crazy Kids. 19:04. ... Binary Options Cash Profits Proof Of Broker And ATM Withdrawal From Bank Account ... Results of my last few trades on Nadex, and a review.