Bland_42

I opened this discussion because I have an idea, but I'm a "relatively newby" and don't know if in the past there was something like this... so I hope to have the opinion of players with more experience than me. Maybe this thing will be better placed in the "suggestions" thread, but for now I'm more interested in an active confrontation with the players. Back on topic, I was thinking about a way to resolve the "nuisance" (for someone at least) of the excessive spotting from CV and subs, and I feel that maybe a solution could be to limit the info given by the spotter to the team. I mean, when a player spot an enemy the position will be marked on the mini-map, but the team could not see (and shot at) the enemy until he is effectively in visual range for every single ship. It's something similar at what happen when there is a storm, but with the spotting happening at normal distance when you are inside the enemy visual range, or when he shot while he is inside your gun range. In my thinking this solution could create new opportunities for active playstyle, because even when spotted a player will not be "saturated" by enemy shooting and could keep moving, but at the same time the enemy team will be forced to act and move in order to engage him. Perhaps this will also alleviate the problem of subs over-spotting, so they will no longer be able to mark the target for the team shooting. At the same time this change will be something more historical than what we have actually, beacuse in the past ships could not shot at something that was out of sight. Well, now I stop myself and will wait for the sealclubbing

Still a game. I'm a difficult guy, I know.

Maybe our "comunication problem" is partially caused by my personal definition of "game" and "simulation". For me a simulation need to be hyper-realistic, and could be totally unfair and unruly. A game however need rules to create a kind of fair play, even if only a partial one... even card games have different (randomly drawn) cards for the players. I think, only based on myself, that you are VERY generous.

Absolutly right.

Light direction was also very very important (battles of Jutland and Coronel).

Personally, I see a fair number of inconsistencies in this argument. This is a game, not a simulation, much less a warfare one. If not WG will not have a reason to derail from strictly historical data for every ship (or never adhere to them), or "balance" them, and we could have battles of T4 vs T9, or 4 players vs 20, and people will use ships like italian MAS or german and japanese mini subs. And we would have minefields around the map. That would be something like a warfare simulation. But WoWs is not that, so if WG feel the need to satisfy the players (clients) then it's mean that they need the game to be "more or less" fair for everyone. He was a terrible player, he never hit me. The argument behind my idea was a substantial change (hopefuly in better) but without eliminating CVs, subs or DDs from the game... so WG could still sell hers premiums, but players will be a bit less toxic about.

I hope that we could stay away from politics and similar mathers, at least in this thread. However... in my opinion that model was exactly like math, based on the assumption that everyone will follow the instrutions. But if everyone inside the system will derail slightly from those instrutions, the problems will be amplified, making the system ineffective. This is only academic and theoretical. Now please, let's stop with this borderline argument. It's not a good historical moment for this.

All true, but only if they see me. What I'm trying to prevent is concentrated fire by undetectable enemies, all aiming thanks a single spotter (even worst if the spotter is undetected) like a DD, a sub, or planes... Like I said, my idea wasn't related to that... but honestly I feel that playstyle is currently "a bit" OP, so if it will be limited may even be not so bad. If needed, WG could give them some gimmicks to resolve new limitations, but that will happen only after other substantial changes. I recently meeted bot subs on the PT server and they were terribly annoing. I also remember months ago (january maybe) a game where a sub player followed my Lyon for half match, keeping saturating the water with torp volleys, never detected or hit by anyone. So until I will meet them again in their current state, I will not be so sure about their being "no more OP". We will see...

Not sure if I have the capacity to realistically explain myself, because what are you saying I think it's not what I'm trying to speak about. What I'm suggesting is not related about the interaction between a player and his adversary, but only about the data shared inside the same team. Simply put, the fact that if I could see a "red" and shoot at him will remain the same as it is now, but if someone of my "green" team is not in direct sight he will not see that "red" in 3D even if he is inside his gun range. At the same time, if the "red" is shooting and is inside my field view I will see him 3D, even if he is out of my gun range. Sorry but I really could not understand what you mean here. Unless you are saying something about secondaries beying able to shoot at targets without seeing them, but I don't remember that being something currently implemented. In this citation, it seems that you think my idea was about camper-fighting and he-spamming... that's wrong. Like I write in the opening, I was thinking of a way to reduce the over-spotting that is a CV and subs charateristic. This without expel them from the game, so maybe WG will take the option in account. And to be clear, I don't like island-camping and he-spamming (if even possible I don't do that even if it means low survability) but it's a fact that game mechanics and ships charateristics made it a good playstyle... then a change of environment maybe could change the way players aproach the problem, but we could not foresight how. So that will be eventually a consequence, but now I'm not trying anything in that direction.

First thing, I must say that I'm not english native so sometimes my comprehension and wording could be lacking. However what I'm suggesting is not about distance of sighting, but simply that I could not see and target-lock at something that is out of my direct sight. What I could not see but someone else could, will be "drawn" on the mini-map but not in my direct fild view (sight). That said, if an enemy is inside my range of fire but out of sight, I could "free aim" at him through the mini-map (obviously not so easy feat).

Hello to everyone. I'm a fairly new player, and must say NOT a good player... also not english native. So while I try to make a contribution, it's possible that I write something really inaccurate (or wrong), then please correct me whenever you see fit. While I think that MM is not the best "item" we have in the game, also don't think it could be easly improved. So maybe a half-solution would be trying to create better players (if possible). Maybe this could be done giving more "prizes" to the players for acting "correctly": things like a new ribbon (with xp points) given every 2-3 minutes in game, paired with awarding distance made (like I think they reward potential damage). Those are only examples, not real proposals. They need to be "aimed at the target" to be of any effect. Also there is the necessity to calibrate that prizes for the ship type, obviusly. Not sure if this could really make any difference, but maybe it's possible that could stimulate a part of the players to be more inclined to play better. So less bad players, a greater chance to have a fair (funny) game. Another thing that I think could be interesting to test, to see what will be the results, is a version of "Assimetrical Battle" divided not for ship tier but for player win-rate. In my idea the group of 24 players (numbers like the MM in Random) will be divided with the best 9 players in one team, and the others against them. This ideally without ship-tier division, or a +/-1 selection. What do you think of this mine idiotic delusions? PS: not sure if it's the correct place to post this... so if it's wrong, I'm sorry