ST - T10 Ship Specific Upgrades

[loppantorkel]

2 hours ago, ghostbuster_ said:

CV revision should start first to be put in hold by those upgrades. Not only CV rework. Like i said there are still some bugs. 

 

What are those ideas? Because every idea that i and people that i know found bad, didnt turn out it was a good idea. 

I've not specified you as one of those people, I'm not keeping track, but every time - badges, removal of stealth fire, smoke changes, deep water torps, changes to cvs, even the introduction of a single premium dd caused people to exclaim the end of the world - every time something is changed or introduced to the game too many players on this forum start a riot about WG messing it up again. After the changes have been done, business as usual and most of the time the game has benefited from them. Even the introduction of Asashio serves a purpose

29 minutes ago, 159Hunter said:

I agree with his statement because it makes sense to me. But not to you it seems. So let me explain:

 

WG stated that they are working on CV rework (but that it's not easy and early). Yet they will now add extra AA mods and CV mods without having CV rework finished. So for all we know these mods will conflict with the CV rework. Which will mean double work afterwards.

 

Plus the CV rework is long overdue. Can't they finish it before adding new modules that aren't needed at tier X ( cause it is a pretty balanced tier ).

 

OH and. Adding a mod for an unfinished ship?

 

Yeaa... I still believe they can handle their internal development plans better than any of us. You think they're putting cv rework on hold for these modules? They need to keep adding things to the game for it to stay alive and fresh. Cv rework is an extra necessity I'm sure they would've preferred to be without.

[wilkatis_LV]

45 minutes ago, 159Hunter said:

WG stated that they are working on CV rework (but that it's not easy and early). Yet they will now add extra AA mods and CV mods without having CV rework finished. So for all we know these mods will conflict with the CV rework. Which will mean double work afterwards.

Whatever they are introducing now is for the game as it is right now. Whenever the CV rework will be implemented, I'm sure all the systems connected to it will be adjusted. Quite obvious, isn't it?

 

45 minutes ago, 159Hunter said:

OH and. Adding a mod for an unfinished ship?

Adding a mod for EVERY tier 10 ship. Or do you expect Wooster to be unique and not have one?

[159Hunter]

1 hour ago, wilkatis_LV said:

Whatever they are introducing now is for the game as it is right now. Whenever the CV rework will be implemented, I'm sure all the systems connected to it will be adjusted. Quite obvious, isn't it?

 

Adding a mod for EVERY tier 10 ship. Or do you expect Wooster to be unique and not have one?

I love how you forgot to quote the part where I talked about the balance on tier X. It's not like tier X needs it.

 

CV rework  however is needed. If only to fix the broken UI. Quite obvious no?

 

Sure make a mod now for a ship they are still testing. If WG wants to do overtime, it's their money?

 

 

 

 

[159Hunter]

1 hour ago, loppantorkel said:

Yeaa... I still believe they can handle their internal development plans better than any of us. You think they're putting cv rework on hold for these modules? They need to keep adding things to the game for it to stay alive and fresh. Cv rework is an extra necessity I'm sure they would've preferred to be without.

As shown by, for example the buggy port chat and how they linked divisions to it. So yeah. I don't think they always have their priorties straight.

 

I also think they have no clue what to do with CVs and I also prefer fixes over new things. Just for a couple of patches. And then they can go all in with new stuff for all I care.

[wilkatis_LV]

2 hours ago, 159Hunter said:

I love how you forgot to quote the part where I talked about the balance on tier X. It's not like tier X needs it.

I quoted both points that I responded to, there was nothing else tied to those exact points in that comment

 

2 hours ago, 159Hunter said:

CV rework  however is needed. If only to fix the broken UI. Quite obvious no?

It is needed and it is coming. But while it's not here yet - game isn't put on an indefinite "just wait for the CV rework, till then you can't play" - the game is still going on. Introduction of a new special module for every tier 10 ship before the CV rework includes CVs as they are right now

 

2 hours ago, 159Hunter said:

Sure make a mod now for a ship they are still testing. If WG wants to do overtime, it's their money?

Most likely US CLs will be released on 24th May, Wooster is basically done as it is. And again - they are introducing new tier 10 modules for all tier 10 ships, which will be released either together with US CLs or after them meaning Wooster will be in the game.

 

 

How is any of that so hard to see / understand?

[ghostbuster_]

4 hours ago, loppantorkel said:

I've not specified you as one of those people, I'm not keeping track, but every time - badges, removal of stealth fire, smoke changes, deep water torps, changes to cvs, even the introduction of a single premium dd caused people to exclaim the end of the world - every time something is changed or introduced to the game too many players on this forum start a riot about WG messing it up again. After the changes have been done, business as usual and most of the time the game has benefited from them. Even the introduction of Asashio serves a purpose

 

None of those was a bad idea imo. Some might be unnecessary but not bad.

[Darth_Glorious]

5 hours ago, Erga_Buzerga said:

4.5 secs? How did you get there? Or is that with BoS and the "tanky" module?

When I calculated it, I got "only" 9 secs of extinguishing time (30*0.3 =9), which can of course be further enhanced with the module/skill.

BOS and flag, without the module :

30 * (1 - (0.5 + 0.20 + 0.15)) = 30 * 0.15 = 4.5 s

[WeGreedy]

19 minutes ago, Darth_Glorious said:

BOS and flag, without the module :

30 * (1 - (0.5 + 0.20 + 0.15)) = 30 * 0.15 = 4.5 s

30 s * 0.5 * 0.8 * 0.75 = 9 s

Spoiler

http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Fire

For example, if all three reduction effects are stacked, the duration of a single fire on a battleship or carrier is: 60 seconds x 0.85 x 0.85 x 0.80 = 34.68 seconds.

 

[loppantorkel]

14 hours ago, 159Hunter said:

I love how you forgot to quote the part where I talked about the balance on tier X. It's not like tier X needs it.

 

CV rework  however is needed. If only to fix the broken UI. Quite obvious no?

 

Sure make a mod now for a ship they are still testing. If WG wants to do overtime, it's their money?

It is their money. Given the playerbase you encounter in the game, would you want them to design the game for you? I would not. They are working on the issues of the game. They are also introducing new ships and features meanwhile. I don't see the conflict. Some things are more difficult and require more time to fix than others. Maybe they had to scrap the cv rework 2017 because it wasn't good and had to start over? They can't halt all other aspects of the game because of this. The playercount would drop off quite fast if nothing new happened for over a year.

[ghostbuster_]

10 minutes ago, loppantorkel said:

It is their money. Given the playerbase you encounter in the game, would you want them to design the game for you? I would not. They are working on the issues of the game. They are also introducing new ships and features meanwhile. I don't see the conflict. Some things are more difficult and require more time to fix than others. Maybe they had to scrap the cv rework 2017 because it wasn't good and had to start over? They can't halt all other aspects of the game because of this. The playercount would drop off quite fast if nothing new happened for over a year.

So if they fixed the bugs first, playercount would drop off. Interessting. Didnt know that people love bugs so much. 

[loppantorkel]

1 hour ago, ghostbuster_ said:

So if they fixed the bugs first, playercount would drop off. Interessting. Didnt know that people love bugs so much. 

If bugs are driving people off, they'd lose money. I'm sure they are trying to prioritize not losing money. Major bugs are probably prioritized, minor ones - not so much. I'm not overly troubled by bugs in the game atm.

[ghostbuster_]

9 hours ago, loppantorkel said:

If bugs are driving people off, they'd lose money. I'm sure they are trying to prioritize not losing money. Major bugs are probably prioritized, minor ones - not so much. I'm not overly troubled by bugs in the game atm.

Introducing ridiculous new upgrades for the ships at "the most balanced tier" is more important than fixing "minor" bugs? Btw, those bug might not trouble you but they trouble me. And im sure im not the only one who is annoyed by those bugs.

[Xevious_Red]

Well these are hardly likely to take up the dev's time - they don't require any 3D modelling, they aren't a change to the mechanics of the game, they don't involve re-writing one of the existing mechanics, they don't involve attempting to recreate an issue and then re-write the code to resolve it.

 

They're pretty much a copy-paste of existing modules with the variable changed, which can then be thrown to the external testers (ST) to check they're not OP/UP. 

[eliastion]

On 5/12/2018 at 12:26 AM, loppantorkel said:

Pretty cool What's not to like about having more options for builds? There's been too many no-brainers for modules.

 

Gearing is a bit odd... slightly harder to hit (like the slimmer YY) and better concealment (again like the standard YY), but you trade damage (which coincidentally YY is having buffed by its new module...) YY still seems like the clear winner here.

Problem is - with more customization you know less about what to expect from enemies - and that's a big difference especially in DD play.

 

The second (linked to the above) problem is the direction (some of) these modules take the game into. For example: remember how Shima got her concealment buffed recently to be less vulnerable to DD-hunters? What do these new modules bring to the table?

 - shima module: more torpedo soup, torpedoes practically can't be used close-range (they turn like BB guns)

 - gearing: more stealth at the cost of a bit of her DPM

Basically, additions like these encourage the most popular DD, notorious for spewing loads and loads of torps, to go for the very playstyle nobody wants to see from her: launching loads of torps from the distance. Her main predator ends up more powerful in match-up against her while she gets the optional buff to torp reload at the cost of close-range performance: WHY.

 

 

Third problem: balance. T X is generally considered decently balanced (compared to other tiers). These modules have, in some cases at least, a big impact on the balance - so the balance is bound to suffer at least until things get adjusted and fine-tuned and we know how much time it takes WG to do things like these. And having a couple options for each ship doesn't exactly make it easier.

 

Fourth problem: comparison with lower tiers. Some of these modules are either almost straight buffs or make specialists even more specialized in their area - this increases the gap between tX and those below - and I don't really think we need that.

 

 

Of course, it's nice to have some customization options but frankly? I personally would prefer WG to stick to balance while making sure that the specs of tX ships are predictable. When you see a Gearing, you should know what concealment and what kind of crazy DPM to expect. Personally - among the new modules provided - there's only one kind I appreciate: the middle-of-the-way ones. There are certain upgrade slots that give you two "directions" to specialize - I appreciate the addition of upgrades that let you go for flexibility instead of just picking whatever direction is best for the ship.

The list does have some upgrades that follow this idea a bit: take Yueyang. Currently YY has following options in slot 6:

1. I have my toooorps (-15% torp reload time at the cost of being more fragile)

2. I have Gearing's DPM! (-12% gun reload time at the cost of gun turning)

But now it would get a new option:

3. I'm a hybrid! (-10% gun reload time, -10% torp reload time at the cost of worse smoke)

 

I would appreciate more upgrades like these. Not upgrades that let you be stronger in some aspect than the ship was with old upgrades, just the opposite: the LESS specialized upgrades. So, for example, instead of giving Shima a ridiculous upgrade that pushes her away from the enemy, give her some specially-crafted "hybrid upgrade":

 - 10% better torp reload time

 - 10% better gun alpha (could be reload since we don't have alpha-changing upgrades but alpha would suit Shima better)

 - 30% worse smoke duration

So, at the cost of smoke and slightly more CD on your torps (-10 instead of -15 from specialized module) you enjoy better gun performance and your torp launchers blow up less readily (making it slightly less punishing to be under fire) - this would allow for a bit less specialized and a bit more aggressive play for those who want to use their guns. It wouldn't make Shima better at torping things (her obvious strongest point) - it's a netto increase in torp reload (compared to the upgrade everyone picks for her now) but it could be a viable alternative for those who enjoy a bit more hybrid-ish gameplay even from the most dedicated torpboat in the game.

 

Unfortunately, some of the new upgrades do the exact opposite thing: they take a ship that's already pretty specialized... and they specialize her even more with a new upgrade.

[Aotearas]

11 hours ago, SeeteufeI said:

German cruiser Hindenburg

Rudder shift is sped up by 20% (instead of 30%)

 

French cruiser Henri IV

Penalty to rudder shift is removed
Penalty to concealment is increased to 10% (instead of 5%)

 

British cruiser Minotaur

Upgrade is moved to the 5th slot
Penalty to the smokescreen lifetime is decreased from 30% to 15%
Bonus to the smokescreen setup time is decreased from 300% to 150%
Added a bonus to concealment of 5%

 

American cruiser Worcester

Concealment bonus is removed

 

Pan-Asian destroyer Yueyang

Upgrade is moved to the 5th slot
Penalty to the smokescreen setting time is removed
Smokescreen lifetime penalty is increased to 30% (instead of 15%)
Surveillance Radar active time penalty of 30% is added

 

Hindenburg upgrade was already meh, just got more meh.

 

Henry upgrade was already meh, just got more meh.

 

Minotaur upgrade was meh, just got more meh.

 

Worcester upgrade at least has a proper tradeoff for the consumable bonuses now. Still looks like a no brainer though since the general playstyle of those ships means that concealment isn't nearly as important as exploiting cover or allied smokes, plus it has plenty good base concealment anyway.

 

Yue Yang upgrade was borderline overpowered, now constitutes a massive tradeoff. Not only does the upgrade trades main battery and torpedo reload bufffs for nerfing your smoke/radar, but it also replaces the Concealment Systems upgrade (ergo you lose 10% concealment and the enemy accuracy debuff, so maximum concealment would be 6,5km surface with the new upgrade) when you chose it. You can stack it with the 6th upgrade for even more main battery OR torpedo reload buffs though. Not sure what to think of it now.

 

Surprised not to see anything regarding the battleship upgrades, nevermind the nonsensical Des Moines upgrade ... if any upgrades needed adjustments (aside from Worcester and Yue Yang) it were those.

 

[Darth_Glorious]

Those upgrades wide the gap between T9 and T10 ships too much.

[fumtu]

30 minutes ago, Aotearas said:

Yue Yang upgrade was borderline overpowered, now constitutes a massive tradeoff. Not only does the upgrade trades main battery and torpedo reload bufffs for nerfing your smoke/radar, but it also replaces the Concealment Systems upgrade (ergo you lose 10% concealment and the enemy accuracy debuff, so maximum concealment would be 6,5km surface with the new upgrade) when you chose it. You can stack it with the 6th upgrade for even more main battery OR torpedo reload buffs though. Not sure what to think of it now.

 

I don't think it worth of concealment. Shima would be able to outspot YY for almost 1km and she is faster so good luck chase her or escape from her. You can have some 2.3sec reload on guns with 6th slot upgrade but your radar will last only 12.6 - 12.7 sec. If they remove that 30% radar nerf and instead add only 5% additional concealment than maybe could be viable. I don't understand that radar nerf when you already losing such important thing as concealment.  From 100% yes to 100% no.