Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Leo_Apollo11

Idea for possible greater player's influence over usage of secondary guns - lets have, for example, user selectable choice: "Main Belt" / "Superstructure" via some keyboard command and presented in "taskbar" !

27 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[SCRUB]
Quality Poster
3,095 posts
8,839 battles

Hi all,

 

Idea for possible greater player's influence over usage of secondary guns - lets have, for example, user selectable choice: "Main Belt" / "Superstructure" via some keyboard command and presented in "taskbar" !

 

 

According to Wiki:

 

http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Gunnery_%26_Armor_Penetration#Secondary_Guns

 

Quote

Secondary Guns

Secondaries aim at enemy ship's mid-ship waterline. At comparatively long ranges, dispersion causes shells to scatter onto other parts of the enemy ship. However at close ranges, secondaries will likely hit the main belt of the enemy ship. In this case, unless the enemy ship has no belt armor, HE secondaries would usually shatter, while AP secondaries can score penetrations or citadels.

 

 

What do you think guys?

 

 

 

Leo "Apollo11"

  • Cool 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KAKE]
Players
890 posts
3,152 battles

And the award for "Longest thread title of 2018" goes to...

 

That said, I wouldn't mind seeing secondaries be a bit more flexible. I'd even be fine if the option only applied to targets you'd manually selected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
3,983 posts
6,038 battles

Yep sounds awseome.

I was thinking about that myself too, seeing how secondaries literally deal 0 damage in close BB brawl since they all hit the belt armor.

This is ofc a strain on mostly Cruisers. If i have the option to use secondaries on a BB or a Cruiser, ofc id pick a Cruiser, even if i hit less. But the hits will mostly be guaranteed damage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BNBS]
Players
376 posts

That takes something to write a title that's 3 times longer than what you added in the actual post.  On the actual point though I think it would be regarded as a super buff for German BBs.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SM0KE]
Players
2,410 posts
6,092 battles

+1. Good idea.

 

22 hours ago, Sybeck said:

On the actual point though I think it would be regarded as a super buff for German BBs.

It's possible they'll need one, depending on how the proposed CE changes work out...?

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
776 posts
12,491 battles

Sounds fine to me, basically because that was already implemented in "Age of Sail 2" almost two decades ago, and probably even before: you could switch ammo (round, grape, canister, chain) and aiming (hull or sails, because a chain shot doesn't make much sense against the former).

 

As a side effect, it could make brawl builds more fancy... but also discourage BBs from getting closer to each other since the rain of steel would do more consistent damage. German, French and Massachusetts would have the upper hand due to their range, acting as area denial weapons for pushes in certain caps with a big landmass on one side, e.g. A cap in North/Northern Lights, while other nations specialise more into the mid/long range combat/support. Which is what they were meant to do anyway.

 

Salute.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[PMI]
Players
2,484 posts
5,882 battles

Given that most if not all BBs can delete cruisers that are within sec range with main guns, why would you aim for anything that was not SS?

 

Honest question, I truly see no point here.

 

Add to that that the trend is to simplify the game, not the other way around. I wish we could choose secondary targets for each side and fwd-aft guns but that would be too much for the average player I guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SM0KE]
Players
2,410 posts
6,092 battles
7 minutes ago, Estaca_de_Bares said:

As a side effect, it could make brawl builds more fancy...

That strikes me as a good thing - it would add more variety to the game, which is usually a positive (anything that avoids the cookie-cutter builds you see in WOT).

 

Perhaps a way to implement such a thing would be via a module, and put that module in a slot that that would normally have a positive effect on the main guns - if you're going to buff one thing, you need to balance it with a nerf to something else. Alternatively/as well, there is always the option of the LU approach: a module that buffs one thing, and nerfs another at the same time?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BS4]
Players
822 posts
5,321 battles
3 hours ago, Leo_Apollo11 said:

Hi all,

 

Idea for possible greater player's influence over usage of secondary guns - lets have, for example, user selectable choice: "Main Belt" / "Superstructure" via some keyboard command and presented in "taskbar" !

 

 

According to Wiki:

 

http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Gunnery_%26_Armor_Penetration#Secondary_Guns

 

 

 

What do you think guys?

 

 

 

Leo "Apollo11"

Hmm this is a tough one being a cruiser player as I don't want ANYMORE fire raining down on me from BB's. On the other hand I like the suggestion of choosing what part of a ship you want your secondary's to focus on...

2 hours ago, Verblonde said:

It's possible they'll need one, depending on how the proposed CE changes work out...?

Wash your mouth out please...:Smile_Default:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SM0KE]
Players
2,410 posts
6,092 battles
1 minute ago, SeaWolf7 said:

Wash your mouth out please...:Smile_Default:

<blub! splutter! ptooey!>

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
Players
378 posts
11,001 battles
7 minutes ago, Juanx said:

Add to that that the trend is to simplify the game

Basically this... Everything WG did in last year was in effort to simplify the game. Adding new layer to sec. fire, I just don't see it happening. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
3,983 posts
6,038 battles
4 minutes ago, SeaWolf7 said:

Hmm this is a tough one being a cruiser player as I don't want ANYMORE fire raining down on me from BB's. On the other hand I like the suggestion of choosing what part of a ship you want your seconder is to foxus on...

 

As it currently stands, the most viable target for Secondaries are Cruisers - because they are bigger than DDs and lightly armor. Secondaries tend to shatter quite often on BBs, even more so when they can hit the main belt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-FF-]
Players
662 posts
5,431 battles

I totally agree, I love this idea.

In addition, I would like secondaries being able to shoot both sides at the same time, but having the dispersion reduction granted by manual secondary perk only on the selected target. 

Secondary builds need love, to help BBs move forward. They are also a ton of fun to play.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
571 posts
3,735 battles
3 hours ago, Sybeck said:

That takes something to write a title that's 3 times longer than what you added in the actual post.  On the actual point though I think it would be regarded as a super buff for German BBs.

Secondaries isn't a competetive build, I don't really see this as a problem. Besides if you are close to a cruiser you're probably dead to his torpedoes anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
156 posts
6,742 battles

Seems like a good idea, not sure how hard it would be to put into the game, but with more control of AA coming soon, maybe we will see a similar thing happen with secondary guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ANV]
[ANV]
Players
211 posts
2,847 battles

I'd like manual secondaries to fire like "normal" if you don't select a target.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,087 posts
7,355 battles

I like the idea but I can see it being a balancing issue, and WG has always been concerned about powerful secondaries being too easy to exploit by bots. 

 

As far as balancing goes, the thing about secondaries is that the actual history of their development doesn't make sense in the context of Wows. Ships like Warspite had an entire cruiser's worth of 6 inch guns down each side when they were built... Later replaced with lighter AA guns. If those original secondaries were given free reign it would like Bismarkageddon for smaller ships. 

 

I do like the idea of being able to use AA guns against close range enemies, though... as actually happened in several BB vs DD fights. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CR33D]
Players
2,949 posts
14,970 battles
19 hours ago, Leo_Apollo11 said:

Hi all,

 

Idea for possible greater player's influence over usage of secondary guns - lets have, for example, user selectable choice: "Main Belt" / "Superstructure" via some keyboard command and presented in "taskbar" !

 

 

According to Wiki:

 

http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Gunnery_%26_Armor_Penetration#Secondary_Guns

 

 

 

What do you think guys?

 

 

 

Leo "Apollo11"

WG stated that RTS CV gameplay is to complicated for the playerbase. So go figure if WG adds something like this or not.

(Hint: their answer would be: this feature is to complicated for our playerbase)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[W-C]
Players
470 posts
2,000 battles
18 hours ago, Leo_Apollo11 said:

ser selectable choice: "Main Belt" / "Superstructure" via some keyboard command and presented in "taskbar" !

Or, to save my poor keyboard, why not just make this (skill? module?) set an aiming point wherever it is that I ctrl-click on the 'target' ship? So f.e. in theory, I could try to do a 'burn sweep' front-to-back to set multiple fires by switching my aiming point along the 'deck' as I set fires to each section. Or on ships with odd superstructure (Nelson?) I could make sure my secondaries are actually firing at the correct 'centre' of the superstructure!?

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BYOB]
Players
3,302 posts
11,592 battles
56 minutes ago, ghostbuster_ said:

WG stated that RTS CV gameplay is to complicated for the playerbase. So go figure if WG adds something like this or not.

(Hint: their answer would be: this feature is to complicated for our playerbase)

Because implementing a one button switch is the same as having a separate UI and controls for a ship class.

We get it, you're salty.:cap_popcorn:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAD]
Players
390 posts

It would only be worth it with manual secondaries so only high tier german and french battleships

I don't think they'll spend their time on that but it is a good idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[CR33D]
Players
2,949 posts
14,970 battles
14 minutes ago, Aragathor said:

Because implementing a one button switch is the same as having a separate UI and controls for a ship class.

We get it, you're salty.:cap_popcorn:

well it might be not the same but the fact remains the same. most of the playerbase enjoy licking windows.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[GOT]
[GOT]
Players
52 posts
4,679 battles

While maybe the option would be nice, wouldn't as a compromise it not also be better to have it aim right between belt and superstructure? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×