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

109 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[I401]
Beta Tester
1,078 posts
8,354 battles

Smoke nerf the game will end bla bla bla

Stealth fire nerf the game will end bla bla bla

Deep water torps the game will end bla bla bla

AP bombs the game will end bla bla bla

...

 

You get my point.

  • Cool 10
  • Boring 5
  • Bad 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MAD4T]
[MAD4T]
Players
175 posts
3,867 battles

my 2c sort of responding to your paragraphs

 

i think the devs responsible for the cv rework should have been locked in a room with a pc for each of them, and made to play original homewolrd pvp with only carriers, fighters and corvettes. while i couldnt be bothered with the real time battle-card style (with manual gimmick) of the current system, for how it failed to integrate carriers or communicate itself, the new system is just stripping that old system to only manual drops and adding 3pc perspective to it.

if they had taken inspiration from homeworld and its formations, some actual rts elements could have been added, where there are none now.

 

my issue with radar is that it renders ships onscreen at all, instead of just the map. and sees through mountains and other ships. at most it should render a circle loosely around the target, referencing the ships radar accuracy which was just a blob in ww2. im quite happy with the delayed rendering idea though since it reflects the scan rate and allows wg a future way to balance radar. ie, the scan rate.

imo it will be the same as shooting a dd dropping smoke.

 

the flooding changes... i havnt paid any attention to beside "oh god make it stop" whenever my ship suffers from it. but always wanted it to reflect the internal compartments better that it does now. and damage other stats than hp. 

eg, flood a magazine or turret compartment to reduce rof/traverrse etc, or flood the engineering to reduce speed. stuff like that.

 

i have personally experienced games that went for mediocrity in the hopes of gaining new players, and you are right, they where all missing the point, and not understanding what was going wrong. and all did damage to themselves.

 

seems like a bit of change aversion panic though.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OMNI]
Players
850 posts
11,772 battles
3 minutes ago, kfa said:

Smoke nerf the game will end bla bla bla

Stealth fire nerf the game will end bla bla bla

Deep water torps the game will end bla bla bla

AP bombs the game will end bla bla bla

...

 

You get my point.

Apparently you didn't though, get the point that is. You can't just generalize with various changes randoml and there is scale between doing harm to the game and "game will end". 

Who complained about smoke nerf? How is it comparable to what we are talking about? About creating uncounterable situations or dumbing down mechanics? Smoke changes was an increase in complexity infact while at the same time achieving a nerf to an easy to abuse mechanic that had very limited and effort heavy counters at the time.

The same goes for stealth fire. (This can somewhat be called dumbing down... butas it removed complexity but it was only a handful of ships affected and the available counter play was also super effort intensive).

DW is somewhat comparable to Russian BB Radar Gimmick but noone really complained much about those... and at the time was pretty original as a gimmick... 15km radar that only spots BBs ... is not orignal it shows you that the devs are completely out of ideas and are just pushing the gimmick thing out of habbit. (Also not dumbing down the game)

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[OP-B]
Beta Tester
370 posts
2,921 battles

Lowering the frequency of Ocean shows the average wows player, so it was to be expected ;p

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NL-UK]
Beta Tester
138 posts
7,688 battles
50 minutes ago, SkollUlfr said:

my issue with radar is that it renders ships onscreen at all, instead of just the map. and sees through mountains and other ships. at most it should render a circle loosely around the target, referencing the ships radar accuracy which was just a blob in ww2. im quite happy with the delayed rendering idea though since it reflects the scan rate and allows wg a future way to balance radar. ie, the scan rate.

imo it will be the same as shooting a dd dropping smoke.

 

This actually is a good idea. Perhaps the closed a enemy ship is the "sharper" the blob becomes. Planes spotting a ship behind an island, okay, I understand that. But with radar? Nah, not really. This game isn't a simulator by any means but implementing xray's ...

  • Cool 2
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MAD4T]
[MAD4T]
Players
175 posts
3,867 battles
44 minutes ago, Spithas said:


 The same goes for stealth fire. (This can somewhat be called dumbing down... butas it removed complexity but it was only a handful of ships affected and the available counter play was also super effort intensive).

just bait them to follow you at the edge of your gun range and keep close control of your throttle. easiest using a dd that has shorter gun range itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-SBF-]
[-SBF-]
Alpha Tester, Players, In AlfaTesters
356 posts
10,323 battles
5 minutes ago, Gilles_Schey said:

This actually is a good idea. Perhaps the closed a enemy ship is the "sharper" the blob becomes. Planes spotting a ship behind an island, okay, I understand that. But with radar? Nah, not really. This game isn't a simulator by any means but implementing xray's ...

Sure radar needs to be realistic, but its ok to douse a fire or stop a flooding with 1 button? Or hydro that sees surface ships? Or BB with 30% hitrate....radar is fine, learn to play.

  • Cool 3
  • Boring 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NL-UK]
Beta Tester
138 posts
7,688 battles
12 minutes ago, Lieut_Gruber said:

Sure radar needs to be realistic, but its ok to douse a fire or stop a flooding with 1 button? Or hydro that sees surface ships? Or BB with 30% hitrate....radar is fine, learn to play.

No need to offend people. 

I have no problem with radar. Thats not what I'm saying. It was just a idea I liked. No need to act like that :)

  • Cool 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-HUN-]
Players
815 posts
8,378 battles

This is chaotic, Why bother spending any money on anything in this game? It is gonna be changed in like 3 months, again! We lose a bunch of money because WG is keep changing everything and we have to act accordingly. I don't even remember how many times captains have been put back by WG. I still have captains that have 14 or 15 points and belong to a ship but don't have any captain skills because it was reverted by WG. Now it is gonna happen AGAIN.

How many doubloons are you gonna use up to change modules on ships because of these changes? Cows being milked...

infinity-million-dollars-dr-evil-meme.pn

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AAO]
Players
1,747 posts
9,483 battles
4 hours ago, Spithas said:


 

Agree with a lot.

 

New Russian BBs with most guns in front and very high firechance ("Nelson inspired bbs"), cause meta needs more bowcamping max range BS -

while simultaneously nerfing flooding because WG, 2016: "we are aware that BBs survive too long"

while giving them radar just after injecting new BS storm mechanisms in the game

etc etc

 

Though I must also admit I don't really care anymore, cause WG itself doesn't give a single :etc_swear: about the quality of this game - random games are unplayable for half a year now already (had 2 tX games yesterday ending in 8 minutes, 7 of those being purely formal) and cause starting next week I'm not gonna be seen in a DD anymore for a long long time, and I'm gonna annoy people with glorious carriers, or play something else while being babysitted by @El2aZeR

 

(or just go some other game. Cities Skylines (or most other paradox products) is very recommended btw)

  • Cool 6
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
443 posts
9,456 battles

I’m kinda with the OP. I just can’t see the logical linear train thought with the WG developers. It’s just like they are all throwing random ideas at the game hoping it will sort of stick together. 

 

Sad really, I really enjoy the game overall but a little break might be in order until they sort their house out or it turns out that’s it’s not as bad as we might think. 

  • Cool 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
Players
4,595 posts
6,879 battles
9 minutes ago, Saiyko said:

New Russian BBs with most guns in front and very high firechance ("Nelson inspired bbs"), cause meta needs more bowcamping max range BS

Best H.disp. of all BBs up to 13km, worst of all past 19km.

Best range is at t10 with 20.7km (well, if you want to go range that would be 24km)

 

So... not much of a sniper line

 

And if you mean that HE will inspire more BBs to be bow on... that's not how that works

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AAO]
Players
1,747 posts
9,483 battles
1 hour ago, wilkatis_LV said:

So... not much of a sniper line

I heard that before you know? Remember German BBs, "only good if you close the distance"?

 

1 hour ago, wilkatis_LV said:

And if you mean that HE will inspire more BBs to be bow on... that's not how that works

I'm not sure what you mean here tbh.

 

What I mean is that this gives way to be the dumbo playstyle that typical yamato/musashi/iowa/richelieu/... does these days - go bow on, reverse, no matter the situation. But combined with spamming HE, just like a lot of French BBs started to do recently(ish).

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
Players
4,595 posts
6,879 battles
2 minutes ago, Saiyko said:

I heard that before you know? Remember German BBs, "only good if you close the distance"?

This is even heavier case than that :Smile_veryhappy: You know, if it doesn't work - turn that up to 11 and try again

 

Ofc there will be :etc_swear: sniping with some magical range build, you can always find those. But don't expect even half decent performance out of them that way, VMF BBs do seem to be punished for opening the distance a bit more than others

 

4 minutes ago, Saiyko said:

What I mean is that this gives way to be the dumbo playstyle that typical yamato/musashi/iowa/richelieu/... does these days - go bow on, reverse, no matter the situation. But combined with spamming HE, just like a lot of French BBs started to do recently(ish).

Thing is, with HE that's still inefficient. They'd be far better using AP and their forwards speed to get some nice broadsides. Especially in randoms where someone pretty much always gives you their side

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AAO]
Players
1,747 posts
9,483 battles
1 hour ago, wilkatis_LV said:

This is even heavier case than that :Smile_veryhappy: You know, if it doesn't work - turn that up to 11 and try again

 

Ofc there will be :etc_swear: sniping with some magical range build, you can always find those. But don't expect even half decent performance out of them that way, VMF BBs do seem to be punished for opening the distance a bit more than others

 

Thing is, with HE that's still inefficient. They'd be far better using AP and their forwards speed to get some nice broadsides. Especially in randoms where someone pretty much always gives you their side

I think we have some misunderstanding here. I agree with everything you say, but you seem to imply that the playerbase has even a vague idea of what they're supposed to do in this game ;)

 

We'll have to wait and see anyway I guess. But I'm quite sure about the HE shooting, once the typical player, at least those that can read, find that firechance number.

  • Cool 3
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
Players
4,595 posts
6,879 battles
7 minutes ago, Saiyko said:

We'll have to wait and see anyway I guess. But I'm quite sure about the HE shooting, once the typical player, at least those that can read, find that firechance number.

Unless Flamu mentions it with great emphasis (as he constantly did with RN BBs) - they won't :Smile_trollface:

 

7 minutes ago, Saiyko said:

I think we have some misunderstanding here. I agree with everything you say, but you seem to imply that the playerbase has even a vague idea of what they're supposed to do in this game ;)

Well, the way I see it is - the clueless hordes are no serious threat at all at like 90% of the time (in not even more), unless you yourself screw up and get overran by them, and the players who will actually be dangerous in them won't be sniping from max range.

Share this post


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

Why is every one of this type of topic so clearly written from a battleship captains point of view?

 

Either battleships are weak or....

 

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,525 posts
13,317 battles

Do any of you remember my predictions two years ago? "RU BBs will get radar." EZ to read you WG. EZ. I actually said that as a joke btw WG. :Smile_teethhappy:

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,542 posts
10,817 battles
2 hours ago, Gilles_Schey said:

This actually is a good idea. Perhaps the closed a enemy ship is the "sharper" the blob becomes. Planes spotting a ship behind an island, okay, I understand that. But with radar? Nah, not really. This game isn't a simulator by any means but implementing xray's ...

Totally in favor of the idea too, especially now that we have "X-marks the target" built into the minimap.

 

Maybe potatoes would actually discover its existence by getting blown up a few times "by cheats and maphax".

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
736 posts
8,136 battles
21 minutes ago, gopher31 said:

hy is every one of this type of topic so clearly written from a battleship captains point of view?

 

And where do you see that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AAO]
Players
1,747 posts
9,483 battles
1 hour ago, mariouus said:

And where do you see that.

In his assumptions. These days those are the equivalent of facts. duh

  • Funny 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-HUN-]
Players
815 posts
8,378 battles

Yeah, try playing RU BBs close to enemy with 4 times the "R"-key at TX. You are on fire. You are on fire. You are on fire. You are on fire. You dead.

  • Funny 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TEACH]
Alpha Tester
2,345 posts
9,223 battles

I don't think WG's long term strategy is in any major and sincere way directed by actual player input. They say it is, but for a long time now with things like rpf, etc we see them tweaking the game for their own reasons using arguments which quite honestly don't hold much water. If their truth-telling could be rated out of ten I'd give it a one or two. We all know by now that when WG decide to do something they set on a course of getting it done and only justifying it all afterwards. Pity they hold overall player opinion in such low regard, but then again, us forumites are the minority and don't really count.

  • Cool 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[YARRR]
Beta Tester
7,891 posts
14,231 battles
33 minutes ago, Humorpalanta said:

Yeah, try playing RU BBs close to enemy with 4 times the "R"-key at TX. You are on fire. You are on fire. You are on fire. You are on fire. You dead.

 

*laughs in HVARs*

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×