Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'fire'.



More search options

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Forum
    • English Speaking Forum
    • Deutschsprachige Community
    • Polska Społeczność
    • Česká a slovenská komunita
    • Communauté francophone
    • Comunità Italiana
    • Comunidad de habla española
    • Türkçe Topluluk
  • Mod Section
    • Rules, Announcements and General Discussion (English)
    • Modding Tutorials, Guides and Tools (English)
    • Interface Mods
    • Visual Mods
    • Sound Mods
    • Modpacks
    • Other Mods and Programs
    • Archive
  • Historical Section

Calendars

  • Community Calendar
  • This Day in History

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


AIM


MSN


Website URL


ICQ


Yahoo


Jabber


Skype


Twitter


Location


Interests

Found 25 results

  1. Dr_Strangefruit

    Ship Fires

    Please WG can you fix the fire damage system. In its current state it is seriously broken, the ability for a single cruiser such as a Henri IV to keep a battleship or cruiser on fire constantly needs to be addressed that or the repair tool should supply a longer fire preventative. Just had a battle in my Lion and an Henri IV managed to keep me burning for the whole of my health. Yes the Lion has a great repair ability vs the fire damage and no I didn't repair after the first fire was set I waited until I had 3 fires on my deck but as soon as the repair tool had run its cycle he lit me up again with 3 fires and as the cool down on my heal is very long I just slowly burnt to death. I could not outrun him as he was way faster than me being in a tricked out French cruiser but this is happening more and more in games now with HE spam being the norm. I know the tier 9 and 10 brit BBs spam HE as well but having seen torps nerfed to hell in regards to flooding chances, is not about time you reworked the fires for all ships in the game or lowered the fire chance for some of the cruisers and battleships to stop the spam and perma fires?
  2. Hi all, Do you have difficulty aiming with torpedoes when your ship is on fire (i.e. huge smoke plumes obscure the aiming when enemy target is near-by)? Leo "Apollo11"
  3. ItsTipez

    Just some ideas

    1: Add special effects when you detonate someone like guns flying off barbettes, lifeboats flying, hull ripping up ect... 2: new achievement; Detonating Strike. If you detonate someone who is over 50%hp, it will award you with this achievement rather than devestating srike 3:a blue name tag that is on your name, which is like violator or division tags. Its purpose will be to tell your team that you have a slow game, and the punishment for being afk wont be applied. 4: issues about he (keep in mind that this is if the player has ifhe through this and the next issue) . If a he shell hits the hull and shatters (like if you are bow on in a bb), there is no way that a he shell can start a fire that way. Another weird angle that can start fires is a shell hitting a deck at 95 degrees and starting a fire (correct me if i got the angle wrong). A bigger issue is he hitting super structure (like the hoods,and has ifhe skill) penning and constantly causing 1k damage each and never getting saturated (i will discuss this in the 5th problem). Also, PLEASE stop adding more he spamming ships or ships which specialize in he. By 2020, battleships will be impossible to play because cruisers are getting more popular and op. 5: fire/he saturation. Imagine a yamato, that got hit in the nose by he and caused a fire, losing 9k hp. Now imagine it again, but with less hp and fire causing the same amount of damage. This is the problem with playing bbs, especially high tier. I wondered why it dosent saturate the hull, like torpedoes do to ships. He hitting the deck in the same place realistically has to saturate it at some point. 6: a built in replay system. Just press a button if you think you liked the battle enough to see it again, drops into a tab and you can watch it infinite times (i know you can do this manually with a few lines of code, but im too paranoid to edit the code without breaking something)
  4. Steph246

    Bug report / shooting bug

    1. Description In a few games, impossibility to shoot or to aim. 2. Reproduction steps Entering a game... 3. Result Pressing the left mouse button, nothing happened 4. Expected result Possibility to shoot targets and to play the FPS 5. Technical details It has happened to me and other players several times. It's not sure it's a bug but a flower power coder thing...
  5. Risalan

    Fire

    As wiki says Fire DamageEdit Damage dealt by each instance of fire on a ship is fixed as 0.3% of its total health pool per fire per second (0.4% for aircraft carriers). Each fire has a base duration of 60 seconds, meaning that a fire which is allowed to burn for the full duration will consume 18% of a ship's maximum health (24% for carriers). Captains of capital ships — aircraft carriers and battleships — can quickly see, then, that while one fire might be considered a nuisance, two or more are a major threat to their ship. But the question is: Fire reduces HP of all ship or just the section burning? When section has 0 HP left fire makes no damage?
  6. So except from CloakingDonkey that for some reason seem to think Russian destroyers will be useless most tests I have seen seem to conclude with two things: 1) They SUCK up to and including T4 2) T5 Onwards they own! One example: This vid is special however as there are hardly any cruisers or DDs to challenge iChase while playing this round. So why are the Russian DDs overperforming? 9% chance to fire 9 - NINE - !!!!. I understand that Rus DDs are long range gunboats with sub-par torpedoes and that they need something to help them perform. But NINE percent is insane - and it will have the BB and even the CA players go on a ragefest on the forums. USN DDs have a 5% percent chance (T5 onwards) that can be buffed to 8% by a Captain LVL 4 skill (possibly at the expence of the LVL 5 stealth skill). If a Rus DD does the same it's chance for fire will be 12%! I might be wrong here but I belive the Rus DDs need to have their chance to fire skill reduced - even 7% would be very good out of the box. Fire is controversial enough as it is - and one of the reasons USN DDs don't feel OP is their bad chance to set fire to targets.
  7. Okay, so first some game mechanics that will be the base of the whole thing. -This is from Sharana's [basics] Damage mechanics This idea of mine would require some plus tweaking to the existing mechanics, but nothing too extreme. Well, Essentially this would be a considerable nerf to fire damage. The basic idea is that to change the fires from a damage dealing tool to a disruptive, more of a "support" one. So, Whenever you hit one of these superstructure sectors, You have a chance of setting them on fire. Now this fire If left unattended can destroy one ship completely, What I would change is that these sectors would have an HP that would be damaged by the fire, and when this HP would reach 0, the fire would stop and you could not reignite it in that section. Now, the sector's hp would be of course linked to the ship's total HP, but sector's cumulative HP would not exceed X%(like, whatever number, still subject to change and all) of the ship's hp. So, You could not kill a ship with fire If the ship has more than X% of it"s hp left The fire damage would be set in a way that for a totally stock ship, without any firefighting skills or equipment, It would take Y seconds to lose one of it's sectors to a single case of flaming barbecue accident, but with skills and equipment You could reduce this Y number, so one fire could not destroy one sector completely even if left untended . This is the first part of the idea. The second one is this: Okay, So You have a certain number of AA and secondary batteries on your ship. Let's take these batteries and link them to the sector which they are located in. Whenever this sector takes damage, you would periodically lose random batteries permanently per Z% of sector HP lost. Like, basically a similar way as You lose planes in a squadron. with all the RNG and all, so You would lose a battery sometimes at Z-A% and sometimes at Z+B%. Overall You could lose C% of your total secondary and AA firepower, Which could be pretty crippling. This would also knock out destroyer torpedo tubes, though way slower and not permanently And Now comes the part when a bunch of faceless people will call me a *insert random class* captain who hates *insert random class* and has no idea what he's talking about and He should learn to play and whatever. So, Why would this be good? Well really simple. It is way more (magic words incoming) "realistic", "believable", would be way less toxic, It would be just as crippling to some classes as the current one.
  8. Lieut_Gruber

    HE critical damage, tune it down please

    The HE crit rate is out of control atm, the countless fires, engine and rudder hits are making especialy the US Cruisers OP. Every salvo on a destroyer ends up being immobilized. BB are perma-burning to death, CV cannot launch anymore once in range of those HE spammers.
  9. conductiv

    DoT status effects

    when comparing damage between the 2 ammo types HE and AP, I noticed that the DoT status effect damage didn't seem come up on the after battle report, this is however a very relevant factor when trying to decide what ammo to use against ships you cannot hit the citadel on. about fire: -Due to the volly style of the shots, getting multiple hits and triggering the fire proc is not uncommon, when you use HE you can usually expect to ignite the enemy in 2-3 vollies (the more guns of a higher caliber the better). -(CV) prevents aircraft from taking off -large ships seem to be able to take multiple instances of fire (max 3) with different countdown that deal damage, the damage will add up however. -the damage seems to be percentual..meaning the higher HP the target. I don't know the exact percentage, but it seems to be close to 0,5% per tick -the DoT lasts ~45 seconds as far as I have seen. -estimated total damage seems to be around 10% of the target, this is quite significant furthermore, the fire status effect seems to have skill support with the pyromaniac perk (+5% chance.... additive or multicumulative?) also various counters (defensive upgrade -5% chance, perk -7%...again additive or multicumulative?) the other DoT is flooding, common side effect of eating a torpedo -seems to cut max speed in half (severely hampers mobility....useful for landing repeat hits?) -deals about 1% damage per tick (its much stronger then fire) -doesn't seem to apply multiple times (though targets multi-flooded are usually dead right off the bat due to the insane torpedo damage) -lasts about 45 seconds -only has a % chance counter equipment these are my observations, some people might have more exact numbers...but it does beg another question, why isn't HE used more often to hit-n-run against tough targets like battleships? a few ticks of fire on a BB should add up to hunderds of damage extra in the after battle report, and I'm just not seeing it...I have the weird feeling that I'm too affected by the numbers in the after battle report and the stats page to make a objective judgement.
  10. Fatty_TheCaughtCarrier

    Fire Prevention

    .
  11. BlackYeti

    Supertest fire duration changes

    Taken from thearmoredpatrol.com Fires will now be extinguished in 30 seconds instead of 60 on all tiers of destroyers and cruisers, except for Admiral Graf Spee, for which the new number will be 45 seconds. This change is designed to make the low tier gameplay more comfortable for the new players and to reduce the difference between the Repair Party I and Repair Party II consumables. I'd say it's great and about time! Bit sad that the Spee is only 50% affected, this thing needs buffs as any other cruiser. Now give cruisers hydro and def AA in separate slots so they can start acting as the multirole ships they are...
  12. DtXpwnz

    questions about game mechanics

    Hello, I have couple of questions regarding some of the mechanics... 1) Fire dmg is 0,31%of max HP per second per fire? (I am not sure about the exact number) 2) Flooding dmg is X% ?? 3) Not penetrating AP shots, how is the dmg calculated? I know how is damage calculated for penetrating shots, but never seen similar explanation for non-penetrating hits. I will have more, once I remember what was the question I was going to ask
  13. DaWyrm

    Scaling or progressing fires

    Am I the only one who would like to see some sort of more fluid fire-mechanics? I find it looks really silly to be hit by a small-callibre shell with a HE warhead that sets half your ship ablaze in seconds. Would it not make more sense to scale the fires more? One shell might start a minor fire, perhaps only visible as a small plume of smoke. More shells might expand the fire more and eventually you will have a whole section of the ship ablaze. This could be further improved uppon by having fires spread to neigbouring sections if a burning section keeps getting hit. Smaller fires would extinguish faster and do less DPS. The side of this would be that fire extinguishing could possibly be interrupted by more hits making the fire grow and spread. This I think would both look better visually and it would be more realistic and perhaps also help balance the HE-shells a bit. Since fire as it is now burns a percentage of the ship burning you can do silly amounts of damage with a few shells if you start fires on multiple ships in a cruiser or destroyer. This way you would have to land multiple shells to create a larger fire.
  14. We had problems with secondaries causing friendly fire incidents, but there is still one problem remaining. Friendly damage needs further rework. When it comes to FIRE damage. You know, fire, as in flames, not gunshots. It is the second time I got pink because of this BS, not because of my fault. I could not do anything about it. Basically, situation looks like this: I was firing HE at enemy Ibuki from my Mogami, completely zoomed in. And suddenly I get the message that I caused friendly damage. Turns out that "friendly" BB rammed me and got under fire of my turrets, while I could not see him. That itself would not be a problem - I immediately ceased fire. What is the problem, is the burning damage - the guy didn't put fire out out of spite I guess and he took a good couple of thousands of fire damage that way - I turned pink and died due to self damage. So, even though I was not in the wrong and I ceased fire as soon as I realised there is a massive friendly BB in the way, I still got punished and died, even though I could not do ANYTHING about it. Damage over time should not be inflicted by friendly ships, period. Thing is - these damage types in case of accidental fire do not depend on the user - so punishing for this is pointless. Accidental torps or hits happen - but as soon as you cease fire, that should be it. Fires and flooding are random factors and punish players literally for having a bad luck with RNG at this point. This is bloody unfair, especially that you can't force friendly ship to put fire out - so he may just keep the fire out of sheer spite, ticking you friendly fire treshhold. That way, you may go pink because of a single accidental hit. That is an exploitable flaw. You are supposed to go pink for deliberate, continuous friendly fire, not for accidental crappy RNG.
  15. Yoshi_EU

    Detailed Questions / requests

    General Questions: 1.01) Formula with fire chance + fire resistance - where can you set fire? belt? watch tower? deck only?1.02) How does angling effect your Broadside bubble? Does the RNG eplise rotate with the ship..?1.03) 3s delay on spotting, WG Staff says it was there since CAT, now claims it was added last patch to prevent flicking , no information on change log, official statement wanted!1.04) flickering on SA was supposed to be reduced by doing that, but planes icon are still flicking and Teleporting around the map, why?1.05) Date: Team Battle season 1 End (Rewards for Alpha league teams?)1.06) Date Team Battle season 2 start, and time between the season -- Ship rewards? or only flags + money?1.07) Ranked Season Start date? The reason for the big delay?1.08) Upcoming Game modes, Forts? (Test, Standard, Singlebase, Assult, Symm_convoy, our_convoy, enemy_convoy, awesome, tutorial, megabase, forts --> Source is ingame scripts (class GameMode))1.09) What happend to replay controls - fast forwards, stop ect... progress on the integration of replays?1.10) Why is it not possible to see Event progress like GNB ingame? Ingame browser?1.11) Detailed information of money calculation and xp: Base capture, Plane kill xp, xp per damage...1.12) Teamwork should be more supported, why are there no support ribbons or rewards, for using defensive AA near allied ships, kill assisting, spotting dds or cruiser, intercpeting enemy aircraft near allied ships...1.13) Documentation for mods, whats allowed, what isn't? Software, which classes changes will be accepted by the game...?1.14) Why is the catapult fighter not reacting on prioritizing a target when they are in range?1.15) Why can dds get module depletion and take hits and torpedoes hits on that section without taking damage, but cruisers and battleships can't? -- No damage with HE on those sections1.16) Would a realistic mode (for training room only or on Events) possible? (far future) I terms of no mini map, no spotting range -- you are always detected, no plane or torpedo warnings (no markers)...? Overall it should be no/minimum effort for the dev just to disable the named features for a new game mode. 1.17) When does a turret get destroyed, how is its HP counted? 1.18) Fire Resistance skills / modules are basically useless, why? For Port information, that would be nice to have:2.01) Penetration values for rounds, secondaries, bombs, torpedoes.2.02) Int ital firing angle on Max range / gun elevation at max range (to compare gun arcs by using angle + travel time)2.03) Smoke duration values and sizes / how long the smoke lasts2.04) Catapult plane stats (Plane tier and so on...)2.05) Splash radius HE rounds2.06) Ship length in in game length values (to compare size) 2.07) Armor view in port --> coming in next big patch (hopefully)2.08) AP damage: Pen, Overpen, Citadell. -- AP Bounce Angles2.09) Time for a full (360°) Turn on Full speed and Half speed And before you complain: "Search the forum for the answers": The information given on the forum was insufficient or incomplete, or outdated. Especially for smoke duration (3), I would love to have a complete table for all ships with the time in seconds. Also please try to answer point directly (of course you can use others arguments), otherwise this will quickly escalate in a full discussion of point X. I will update and link to useful answers once they are given.
  16. DontShootBrah

    HE Discussion.

    I think that the HE system needs a little bit of a rework within the game, the fires are insanely out of control. Yesterday I managed to sink an Yamato in a T7 ship, just because I kept causing fires from my Napalm Shells. Today, I got sunk by 2 T5 Omaha's with their 1mm puckleHEfiring guns, not a single omaha struck me with its torpedoes, just the insane napalm barrage. It feels like the crews scrub the decks with gasoline, or other highly flammable liquids.
  17. If you think you know all that is to know about Ishizuchi, you may be wrong. ,,Sailing in at tier IV, this battleship is often thought of as a proto-Kongo (a mean ship in its own right). The Ishizuchi is the perfect Premium ship to master the fundamentals of battleship captaining: big guns, heavy armor, and intimidation." (present description on Wargaming official page) Facts: Wargaming was lying months ago about this ship and is still lying rudely about it. Ishizuchi is NOT "a great choice" or a "perfect ship". Example: ,,the perfect Premium ship"... First lie - heavy armor. For tier IV, Ishizuchi has an extremely weak citadel (203 mm), less than any battleships on tier III-IV you can see at this moment in the game, and a pretty weak hull armor. Even tier III battleships have 305 mm citadels, like South Carolina and Kawachi. Kawachi as tier III has better armor than Ishizuchi (tier IV), both citadel and hull parts. Second lie - big guns, comparable punch. That's a shameless lie, designed to create the image of power and destruction. Power and destruction? Mmm... NO. It has 305 mm guns, which are horrible due to bad penetration, nasty accuracy and (again) horrible dispersion. Yes, this is the word that describes this ship. HORRIBLE. The penetration is so bad, that you're asking if they mistakenly put the 203 mm guns from Furutaka on Ishizuchi and called them "305mm". Along with bad armor, penetration and accuracy, comes the fact of small range, 12,9 km, one of the things that will drive a Ishizuchi owner mad, since there are ships like Myogi (6 guns, 365mm, more than 15 KM range) , Wyoming (12 guns, 305 mm, 14,1 KM range) and Phoenix (if I remember well - some 10 gunsx152 mm, 13,7 KM range that can be raised to some 16KM with one of the 4th skills of the captain), which can give a serious kick from greater distances. Wanna light the Ishizuchi on fire? NO PROBLEM. Third lie - intimidation. You cannot intimidate when you have a horrible ship. Everybody who knows "her", knows that she's the perfect target. Period. Now... what people don't know, is that Ishizuchi is getting TOO EASY on fire. I've used the ship too many times to be wrong about this. It doesn't matter if she's fast. Most of the time you'll encounter faster ships or ships that have both speed and greater range. Just imagine what's the outcome. Ship's on fire. You use the repair consumable. "Oh, no, now it's on fire again. But I just repaired it. Great, here comes a torp..." Well... that's the course of things with this ship. Beside that, there are other aspects. Anti-aircraft defense. VERY BAD, even if you have a skillful captain. The AA guns fire like the crew is drunk, sick, drugged... or something. Secondary guns have bad accuracy as well, and they have a bad range, even if you manage in the end to enable the 4th skill of range. So... defense? What defense? It's a joke. The entire ship is a joke. A bad joke. At least here (secondary guns) WG could have done something, but as far as I saw, they just take money and leave the player in possession of a ship that clearly is pretty unusable. And now comes the worst part: when players who enjoy playing low tiers enable the 4th skill of their St. Louis, Phoenix, Kuma, Tenryu (etc) and some long range guns destroyers... they have no trouble destroying Ishizuchi, spamming fire. In case of a dd that can shoot at more than 13 km away, when you sailing Ishizuchi with his 12,9 KM range, YOU DON'T EVEN SEE THE GUY WHO'S SHOOTING YOU, AND YOU CANNOT SHOOT BACK! Another thing. Like all these problems weren't enough, this is the only battleship who gets constant damages to the... rudder. Considering guns range, turret rotation speed, the deck "inclined" to catch fire, the bad armor and the bad AA guns, having a problem with the rudder is even worse. More than that, last updates seem to bring something very unpleasant. Almost full HP ships destroyed in a single salvo. That haven't happened before, and I played it many times before the updates. Imagine a battleship like Ishizuchi, 40000 and some HP... one blow (and that was angled, not a 90 degrees shot), and it's gone. Really, now. How to have fun with this ship? And Wargaming has and is doing nothing about it. Now... Some kid told me to enable the 4th skill. Where that kid failed - is that 4th skill of range works on guns up to 155 mm (in this case works just on the secondary useless guns, since the main guns have 305mm). Some accused me of asking for a "pay to win" ship. Nope. This is not the case. I just paid money to have fun. I have experience with this, and I don't have fun. Simple as that. And so on... Some people asked me why I haven't take the refund. Well, because it had a limit of 14 days, if i remember well (not nearly enough to properly test a ship), and implied some procedures that I do not agree with. More that that, I dislike very much to be lied, I dislike even more to be tricked. If someone who sells a thing (Wargaming in this case) say something about that thing, they should make sure the description FITS the product. Otherwise they must be accountable for the problem and change the product with a better one (since the buyer was lied), which in this case could be done. There's another option, one that is called "buffing". So far Wargaming has done NOTHING about it, not even when people start complaining about Ishizuchi. They did it for the ATAGO, but not for Ishizuchi, which means they don't respect their customers. So, you do something for those who paid more (Atago), but nothing for those who paid less (Ishizuchi). N.O.T.H.I.N.G. If in my first post about Ishizuchi I was using a lot of cuss words due a lot of anger, now I come with all arguments, after sailing Ishizuchi in many battles. I expect moderators to be fair, as they should always be. If you know what I am talking about, please use the poll. Let's demand the ship our money deserve. Thank you One annotation: As far as I see on their profiles, people like Phantombeast and Hellhound666 have never fought a single battle in Ishizuchi. I respectfully ask that people treat this poll in a serious manner, as we talk about WORKED money. Work, you what that is, I hope... These two negative votes don't count.
  18. I am playing WoW since 10/27/2013 and there were updates and patches. Most of them were improving game until today. Today we get "game over" update. Reasonable question is why... So, there are my five cents: * no stealth fire: we have less cruisers in game...except Kutuzov and Belfast, and Royal Navy cruiesers (paper ships) which have smoke, * some of good players are very accurate while using spotter airplanes... now spotter airplanes are useless * I've played about 30+ games today and guess what, most of them were consist of BB and DD's, (most games I had there were about 5 DD on each side) * Now, most of people are hiding in corners and behind island waiting for ships to light up so they can snipe * I really would like that some of testers or devs read this topic to give me honest, true answer what they were thinking when they decide to remove stealth fire. Even in true world scientist are developing ships with stealth characteristics using special design, materials... that intention was from start of building war ships, to make ships undetectable while be able to shoot. * what is next: maybe to be detected while in smoke?! * and most of this cause some BB's players are crying while they were hit by cruisers or destroyers who are in stealth mode? To those players I have advice: come closer big guys with huge amount of HP, show your power. Don't be bully who is running away in a moment when someone smaller with less power shows strength. * this game was more dynamic while it was in beta than today * the basic rule of something which is working right is: Do not try to fix it, cause you will ruin it (Murphy) * ..... For me, after three and half years of playing this game, this decision is more then....(don't have right word to say).
  19. malaquey

    Where to hit a ship to cause fire

    I wasn't able to find this information anywhere so I thought I'd make a thread. To cite one example I hit a Yamato a total of 27 times with my Izumo's HE shells not to mention however many secondary shells without causing a single fire. If each hit had the stated 32% fire chance then there is approximately a 99.997% chance to cause a fire. Even with a 20% fire chance assuming skills and equipment then there is still a 99.8% chance to cause a fire. If we assume I didn't get horrendously unlucky then that means the HE shells don't have a uniform chance to cause a fire. My question then is does anyone know where you need to impact a ship in order to have a chance of causing a fire with HE shells? It would make sense that hitting the hull of the ship would be ineffective but in this example almost all of my shots went into his superstructure. My hypothesis is that shots have to hit the deck of the ship to cause fire with the given chance. Hits to the hull and superstructure either cannot cause fire or cause fire with a reduced chance. Can anyone shed some light on this? TLDR;does the point of impact affect the chance an HE shell has of causing fire
  20. when i stopped playing the warspite i had a 61% win rate with it. today i came back after about 12-14 months and cannot get it to perform well at all. a mogammi engaged me so i rushed into my shortish range like i used to to avoid plunging fire. however unlike before every ap shell i took to the front deck was Heavy damage and wasent repairible. leaving me down about 18k hp in the time it took me to close in. i continued closeing the range to about 12k so he was hitting the very heavaly angled side of my ship and he was still doing 8k+ salvos every 14 seconds*ish* where as my salvos were all overpenning the waterline for around 1100 dmg per shell of which i was landing about 3-7 per volley as he knew how to manuver well. off course i lost the dps race and sank 1st. this never used to happen. bow on the warspite used to be Immune from smaller guns other than the superstructer which is acceptable. now she just feels outclassed and when uptierd unlike an uptierd DD she feels like a burdon on the team. how do you guys play the warspite in the current patch? and how the ***************** do you try to 1v1 a tirpitz? in a later game me and my mate both in warspites got rushed by a tirpitz and he torped us both and continued on his merry way on about 15k hp. even angled he was able to citadel us infront of the number one turret which seems odd while his hull armor bounced or took very little damage in return. turtle armor weak at range pahahaha nah, turtle armor vs low tier ships is op..... in otherwords since i stopped playing the warspite and learned how to play BBS well, comeing back to the warspite the ship feels terrible. slow, burns easy, torp pretection is pritty meh. tall. blocky bridge takes lots of damage, turrets get knocked out by other BBs, your down on total shells compaired to other t6 BBs and the hull damage model is very unforgiving. send help
  21. So I win the duel with another player and come out on top. He set me on fire plenty with his HE but I sunk him fast with my AP. So after extinguishing one fire, of course there are 2 more burning and burning and burning, even though he was sent to the sea floor long ago. In the end my choice of AP was not rewarded at all, actually i won nothing through my superior aim and better damage: I burned down to less than 10k life. This is all the more not really sensible, since my fight ended a good 20 seconds before the fire went out, so why didn't the gun crews rush to the fire and help kill it? Fire is a serious threat to the ship and nobody in their right mind would just linger around the guns, when there is no immediate threat but by those fires. So: When the guns rest the fire goes out quicker. Much quicker. I'm trading my firepower for repairs and being the winner of a firefight, I get to actually see the benefit of my efforts!
  22. PPKinguin

    Burn Ticks

    So I just had a match in the Amagi, and I was burning a lot and the last fire I got was total [edited] I had not much life left in me and couldnt repair, it was gonna be a close call. My last second: 1. tick goes off, I have 120HP left 2. half a second later the fire goes out, I read "Fire out" 3. I explode another half a second later What the hell wargaming? What does "fire out" mean to you?
  23. The_TrashMan

    [suggestion] Floding, Fire and damage

    Right now flooding and fire work the exact same way - A Damage over Time effect that chips at your HP. That's it. I find such implementation overly simplistic, downright wrong and lacking. First, I'd propose that flooding has a separate HP bar (equal to a ships tonnage/volume or HP bar). That bar represents flooding and how much water your ship can take. The more the bar is filled the worse your ships mobility is affected. Furthermore, depending on which side you are hit, the ship can begin listing. Multiple torpedo hits on one side will be a worse case than getting hit from both. To stop listing, the player can deliberately flood the other side of the ship, which prevents the ship from flipping, but fills more of his water/bouyancy bar. Needless to say, if the bar is comepletely filled, your ship sinks. Once the holes are plugged and water no longer rushes in, pumps will SLOWLY eject most of the water, restoring the ships mobility. Also, AP shells that hit below the water line should also be able to cause flooding. Fire on the other hand...historically, ships have been on fire for hours and came out on top. Fire should reduce your visibility and aiming, as the smoke gets in the way, and it will also make you easier to detect by enemies. Furthermore, fire can cause damage to other modules and there is small chance it might spread into your ammo or fuel storage. Flooding the ammo storage can remove any risk of explosion, at the cost of some your bouyancy (the other bar). For carriers, risk of fire is greater if there are airplanes being refuled/rearmed. A dive bomber squadron dropping a bomb right on top of fueled and armed aircrafts on the deck was a big thing in WW2. Jet fuel would catch fire, ammo would go off. Carrier were lost to these things. For each squadron being readied, there would be a +X% chance of fire.
  24. Sir_Grzegorz

    Unlimited fire time?

    Hi all, I have question regarding fire. This case I have noted several times but only on Yamato so far. I got hit, fire start burning, no timer on fire. It just keep going on. Does anyone of you had something similar? Is it graphical bug, so there is timer but it is not shown? Any ideas? Sorry I do not have replays on, I am just to bad to show it to the world. Could it be some setting thing? Thank you for your explanations if any.
  25. dasCKD

    Preventing camping

    WG has attempted to once again prevent camping, this time by nerfing battleship bow armor. This comes across as a government effort to boost the consumption of locally produced products by lacing the produce with the scent of raw sewage. This is old news however, so I thought I might create a list of some things that would prevent camping. I have noticed that the engagement levels on my threads is quite low, and I suspect it might be because I write too much. I will therefore keep this thread short and on point. This is a list of things that WOULD prevent battleship camping. Reduce AP penetration at long ranges Battleships who sit at long ranges sometimes scores a random citadel hit at long ranges with plunging fire and this bolsters their desire to camp and camp hard. If the effectiveness of plunging fire is drastically reduced, battleships would be encouraged to close in to do more damage. Significantly improve cruiser ballistics at long ranges (USN included) If cruisers had better ballistics, they would be able to engage SN DDs at longer ranges and the most recent nerf wouldn't have been needed. It would also mean that if battleships insists on sitting bow on at maximum range, they won't be able to sit safely at the back anymore because the bow on thing will make themselves an easy target for just about every single cruiser on the enemy team. Think of the Zaos but everywhere. Make incoming fire alert a first line skill If incoming fire alert did become a line one skill, then more cruiser captains would be able to take it and avoid hits at long ranges. This would mean that battleships would need to get closer before they can start scoring any significant damage. Improve battleship concealment, increase battleship concealment penalties when firing The first change will allow battleships to get closer before alerting their prey. The latter would mean that those who just fires randomly would just make themselves an easy target with the improved cruiser ballistics suggested above. Many may have criticism of the suggested ideas, but all of this would either stop or at least disincentive battleship camping by making back line camping a much more dangerous prospect for them.
×