Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Crowarior

Tighter grouping of shells from same turret?

34 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[VMBS]
Beta Tester
30 posts
3,348 battles

I was thinking a little bit since I had nothing better to do and this idea came to my mind. Right now, as you all know, once you pull the trigger each shot gets random dispersion. What if devs change the dispersion mechanic by adding smaller dispersion circles for each turret so that shots fired from the same turret would hit almost the same spot? Each turret would still have random dispersion inside the main circle but shots fired from the same turret would be more consistent.  I know this may not make sense or anything but at least it will make ships more consistent when they do hit the target.  This would also mean that ships with more turrets get better dispersion or at least higher chance of scoring a hit. I does kind of simulate reality because dispersion was always decent on most ships, the main problem was finding the proper firing solution and this kinda looks like that, except each turret has its own firing solution. Thoughts?

 

 

 

Untitled.thumb.png.9b630777be21b082e2ef46fbdc2abcc9.png

  • Cool 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VMBS]
Beta Tester
30 posts
3,348 battles
3 minutes ago, loppantorkel said:

What would the end purpose of this be?

More consistent gameplay, less RNG... In this case there is basically 3 times less RNG. Im not saying that shells should be right next to each other but closer to the shells from the same turret. Right now some crazy stuff can happen, for example a shells just randomly goes nowhere near where you were aiming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DC-DK]
Players
2,066 posts
23,555 battles

Think its a bad idea and will cause frustration when you get bad RnG. Simply instead of one or two hits in a volley every shot miss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VMBS]
Beta Tester
30 posts
3,348 battles
4 minutes ago, hgbn_dk said:

Think its a bad idea and will cause frustration when you get bad RnG. Simply instead of one or two hits in a volley every shot miss.

I thought about that but I dont think that you will miss every single salvo. Your average dmg shouldnt really change because even tho you would miss more often when you do actually score a hit you will do more dmg with each hit.

Also, since you would be missing more often it could make BBs push since they wont be taking hits every milisecond.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DC-DK]
Players
2,066 posts
23,555 battles

Problem is small targets. you make more space between each turret. Try look at the 3 turrets combined in the big circle like a shotgun volley with 9 buckshots if you tighten the pattern of 3x3 of these shots you make the likely hood of misses greater. Simply by making the combined area of those 3x3 shots smaller in big circle.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VMBS]
Beta Tester
30 posts
3,348 battles
3 minutes ago, hgbn_dk said:

Problem is small targets. you make more space between each turret. Try look at the 3 turrets combined in the big circle like a shotgun volley with 9 buckshots if you tighten the pattern of 3x3 of these shots you make the likely hood of misses greater. Simply by making the combined area of those 3x3 shots smaller in big circle.

I can see the problem with more more misses... I just dislike current dispersion model and was thinking about how to improve it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VMBS]
Beta Tester
30 posts
3,348 battles

Honestly Im just salty at this point that I miss BB salvos from 6km because of retarded dispersion....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
116 posts

The landing spots of the shells follow what is called a Gauss distribution. They land within an area defined by their initial position (the muzzle of the gun they came from), the spot you are aiming at, the maximum dispersion value at the distance you are shooting at and by the variation of the muzzle velocity. The standard dispersion distance from the target spot is defined by the σ value and the maximum dispersion. While the real dispersion can be anywhere between 0-max, about 68% of the shells have a dispersion value between 0-standard. When you are aiming at a distance that is much greater than the distance between the guns where dispersion values are relatively large (ex 15 km while the maximum distance between the guns is 100m and the standard dispersion is 150m), you can safely say that all the shells came from the same place with a very small deviation from reality, so you get what you discribed in the first image (green). When you are shooting at a close range (ex 2km while the maximum distance between the guns is 100m and the standard dispersion is 20m), you can't say that all the shells came from the same spot and you have to take into account the distance between the guns too, so you get what you discribed in the second image (red).

Combining the above with gameplay now, if you ever happen to have an enemy at a very close distance (when brawling), you can notice that shells fired from the same turret follow more or less the same trajectory and this is because the distance between your guns is comparable to the firing range and the maximum dispersion value at close range is smaller that the distance between your guns (what you discribed in the second image). When shooting at long ranges you can notice that the distance between the guns doesn't even matter because the distance between you and the target is much greater and the dispersion value is larger the the distance between the guns. Keep in mind that dispersion depends on the distance that the shell travelled (the greater the distance, the greater the dispersion value). 

So what you are saying here is in fact already in the game, although it is noticable only at close ranges, where the distance between the guns is comparable to the firing range and greater than the dispersion value at the given firing range. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NED]
Players
4,201 posts
11,706 battles

This is already going beyond my brain capacities. Care to give a somewhat more simplified proposal? I suck in the realm of window licking, keyboard face rolling suckers regarding maths....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VMBS]
Beta Tester
30 posts
3,348 battles
26 minutes ago, Ferry_25 said:

This is already going beyond my brain capacities. Care to give a somewhat more simplified proposal? I suck in the realm of window licking, keyboard face rolling suckers regarding maths....

Basically he is saying that my proposal is already in the game but it is only noticeable at very close ranges.

 

53 minutes ago, GeorgeT1012_gt said:

The landing spots of the shells follow what is called a Gauss distribution.

Tell that to german BBs, because everytime you shoot shells go everywhere but the spot you were aiming at lol. I guess there is no way escaping RNG and making BBs more consistent... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
116 posts
35 minutes ago, Ferry_25 said:

This is already going beyond my brain capacities. Care to give a somewhat more simplified proposal? I suck in the realm of window licking, keyboard face rolling suckers regarding maths....

I'm just a simple engineer, but I'm preety sure that I was tought the Gauss distribution during my high scholl years. It's not something difficult, if you spend some time on it you will find out that this thing is behind a lot of everyday things not just gunnery.

15 minutes ago, Crowarior said:

Tell that to german BBs, because everytime you shoot shells go everywhere but the spot you were aiming at lol. I guess there is no way escaping RNG and making BBs more consistent... 

It all has to do with the standard dispersion (where ~68% of the shots fall). In case of the Gremans, the value is sky-high and as a result the shells are far from each other. The real dispersion is in fact ruled be RNGesus himself but it has to be within the Gauss distribution limits (0-standard ~68%, 0-2*standard ~95%, 0-3*standard ~99,7%).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VMBS]
Beta Tester
30 posts
3,348 battles

Funny thing, just today I had to study distributions because I have exam tomorrow. What a coincidence.

 

BTW, do you maybe know how sigma effects the dispersion? Horizontal dispersion is basically "sigma" in normal distribution but what exactly does secret in-game sigma value do?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DC-DK]
Players
2,066 posts
23,555 battles
4 hours ago, Crowarior said:

Funny thing, just today I had to study distributions because I have exam tomorrow. What a coincidence.

 

BTW, do you maybe know how sigma effects the dispersion? Horizontal dispersion is basically "sigma" in normal distribution but what exactly does secret in-game sigma value do?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[WGP2W]
Players
1,424 posts
9,973 battles
12 hours ago, Crowarior said:

I was thinking a little bit since I had nothing better to do and this idea came to my mind. Right now, as you all know, once you pull the trigger each shot gets random dispersion. What if devs change the dispersion mechanic by adding smaller dispersion circles for each turret so that shots fired from the same turret would hit almost the same spot? Each turret would still have random dispersion inside the main circle but shots fired from the same turret would be more consistent.  I know this may not make sense or anything but at least it will make ships more consistent when they do hit the target.  This would also mean that ships with more turrets get better dispersion or at least higher chance of scoring a hit. I does kind of simulate reality because dispersion was always decent on most ships, the main problem was finding the proper firing solution and this kinda looks like that, except each turret has its own firing solution. Thoughts?

 

 

 

Untitled.thumb.png.9b630777be21b082e2ef46fbdc2abcc9.png

 

 

 

Hey,

 

You are making mandatory mistake. Its not triple turret, its 3 guns turret. Where each gun is  independent in same turret. So basically it is 1 gun is equal 7 when firing etc.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
[TOXIC]
Players
3,784 posts
10,685 battles
19 hours ago, Crowarior said:

More consistent gameplay, less RNG... In this case there is basically 3 times less RNG. Im not saying that shells should be right next to each other but closer to the shells from the same turret. Right now some crazy stuff can happen, for example a shells just randomly goes nowhere near where you were aiming.

Actually, it would be MORE RNG, not less, no matter how you look at this.

1. Counting the number of "rolls":

NOW: roll for each shell

WITH CHANGE: roll for each turret to determine turret accuracy, THEN roll for each shell to determine how far from "turret's aim" each shell falls

 

2. The impact of RNG

Here it's a bit more complicated, but bear with me. Imagine a ship that has only one biig turret with 2 barrels (others are destroyed, if the vessel ever had them). Let's imagine that the grouping from one turret (in your version of mechanics) is extremely close (effectively the shells landing in almost the same place). Let's also imagine that the ship's dispersion produces a situation where, by aiming perfectly, you have about 10% to score a citadel, 40% to hit somewhere else and 50% to miss.

YOUR mechanics: the dispersion is applied to the turret. The difference between shells of one turret is really slim (the extremely good grouping mentioned earlier) so - with perfect aim - the chances of each of various results are like this:

10% chance for 2 citadels

40% chance for 2 hits (pens/overpens)

50% chance for 2 misses

if the in-turret dispersion grows, the chances for mixed results increase, but this takes it further from the extreme of your proposition and closer to the old mechanics

 

CURRENT mechanics:

1% chance for 2 citadels

8% for 1 citadel and 1 hit

10% for 1 citadel and 1 miss

16% for 2 hits

40% for 1 hit and 1 miss

25% for 2 misses

 

Compare the two.

Currently the chances of dealing SOME damage are 75%, the chances of crippling double citadel - only 1%.

By introducing a super-close turret grouping you end up with chances of dealing any damage at all as low as 50% - but the chances of double citadel are as high as 10%! The consistency here is awful - the chances for a critical strike are through the roof but half the time you get nothing at all! And that's just for a 2-gun turret. The more guns in a turret, the more random (compared to the old system) your proposition gets.

 

Of course it wouldn't be THAT extreme when the dispersion within the turret is increased, but the trend will be the same: if you group the shells from one turret more, then the chances of really bad AND really good rolls increase as well. When each shell's dispersion is calculated differently, the damage is just more consistent with less criticals and less complete fumbles. Because sure, you will observe these single shells going who knows where - but your proposition makes it so that, instead, sometimes it will be the whole turret sending ALL its shells way  off the aiming point.

 

 

TL&DR:

Due to the way probability works, your proposition goes in the exact opposite direction to the "more consistent gameplay" that you want by making damage less predictable, especially for ships with few turrets sporting many guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VMBS]
Beta Tester
30 posts
3,348 battles

Well, at least they should buff close range accuracy for battleships then because right now even at 0m distance you dont have pinpoint accuracy. Just now I completely missed perfectly aimed salvo at >6km because of RNG and its so frustrating when that happens. You would think that getting close would improve accuracy but it's the same crap at long range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TOXIC]
[TOXIC]
Players
3,784 posts
10,685 battles
5 minutes ago, Crowarior said:

Well, at least they should buff close range accuracy for battleships then because right now even at 0m distance you dont have pinpoint accuracy. Just now I completely missed perfectly aimed salvo at >6km because of RNG and its so frustrating when that happens. You would think that getting close would improve accuracy but it's the same crap at long range.

So in the end all that talk about changing dispersion mechanics is just you wanting buffs for BBs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VMBS]
Beta Tester
30 posts
3,348 battles
1 hour ago, eliastion said:

So in the end all that talk about changing dispersion mechanics is just you wanting buffs for BBs?

Yes and no. I was trying to come up with something that would improve consistency and reduce RNG and some sort of short range buff for BB dispersion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
894 posts
11,126 battles
1 hour ago, Crowarior said:

Well, at least they should buff close range accuracy for battleships then because right now even at 0m distance you dont have pinpoint accuracy. Just now I completely missed perfectly aimed salvo at >6km because of RNG and its so frustrating when that happens. You would think that getting close would improve accuracy but it's the same crap at long range.

Fun fact: Originally, they had better accuracy, but then the sub-3km dispersion got nerfed for, frankly, good reasons.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VMBS]
Beta Tester
30 posts
3,348 battles
3 minutes ago, AkosJaccik said:

Fun fact: Originally, they had better accuracy, but then the sub-3km dispersion got nerfed for, frankly, good reasons.

That doesn't even make sense. Why would you punish players for getting close to the enemy and doing what BBs do best? Now you miss DDs at close ranges and that should happen. And they will be even harder to deal with after armor changes in future update.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[DC-DK]
Players
2,066 posts
23,555 battles

Because WG want to have you to change ammo from AP to HE when shooting at DD's with a BB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×