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

Module vulnerability

24 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
80 posts
5,221 battles

In my opinion all modules should be repairable to some degree. Let rudder and engine as it is. But let every other module repair itself. There is no ingenious gameplay design behind the current system.

 

In WoT your gun also repairs. In WoWs you can drive around in a ship without torps, guns and AA/secs until the end of game for a fun and engaging experience.

 

MfG Boom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,567 posts
10,292 battles

Agreed.

 


But then again there are so much ships in the game it would take ages to remodel that stuff? 
I am not programmer, merely guessing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
80 posts
5,221 battles
1 minute ago, Boris_MNE said:

Agreed.

 


But then again there are so much ships in the game it would take ages to remodel that stuff? 
I am not programmer, merely guessing?

Well, the calculations for every single AA/sec could be some problem i guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AP-]
Players
2,561 posts
6,319 battles
7 minutes ago, Boris_MNE said:

Agreed.

 


But then again there are so much ships in the game it would take ages to remodel that stuff? 
I am not programmer, merely guessing?

Shouldnt be that hard to implement tbh, id assume that "repairable" is an attribute that wargaming can add to their classes. each module/gun is essentially just a class with values dps, range etc, and functions to determine what their "action" is. All they would need to do is add the "repairable" attribute to these classes(easily done with a good regex search and replace, or just changing the parent class that they inherit from) then you just need to specify how to repair them and what the effect is.

 

The implementation really shouldnt be more difficult than add a consumable to a new ship. As we already have some modules that can be repaired(knocked turrets) all the code and other work needed to implement this should already be done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
725 posts
12,174 battles

They can simplify by leaving AA/secondaries as it is.

Just main guns and main torpedo tubes to be repairable.

I have no idea if there are secondary torpedo tubes, but just be on safe side.

It could be that torpedo tubes on Tirpitz are considered secondary or something. So simplify it.

I like the idea even if it is in simplified form, and that allow to change captain skill for quicker repair, not only prevention.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AP-]
Players
2,561 posts
6,319 battles
10 minutes ago, Sir_Grzegorz said:

I have no idea if there are secondary torpedo tubes, but just be on safe side.

Holy tomato juice that would be awesome and completely terrifying at the same time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SHAFT]
Players
9,832 posts
8,982 battles

Totaly onboard with this.

 

We cant have 2 CVs all the time and lose our defense capability against planes for the entire game.

And i dont see why Turrets/Torptubes need to be able to be permanently destroyed, except making the game more unfun for the receiving end. Its not like everyone knows if a DD has lost 1 torptube, and suddenly he is much less of a threat. Since its basicly impossible to know, you cant count on it.

 

And for me personaly, it would be great if Secondaries couldnt destroy or incapacitate Engines/rudders/guns/torptubes, but i dont think that would be easy to implement, since its based on caliber.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TTTX]
[TTTX]
Players
4,608 posts
8,081 battles
5 minutes ago, thiextar said:

Holy tomato juice that would be awesome and completely terrifying at the same time.

couldnt really be worse than your average random teammate could it? :Smile_teethhappy:

 

16 minutes ago, Sir_Grzegorz said:

They can simplify by leaving AA/secondaries as it is.

Just main guns and main torpedo tubes to be repairable.

I dont really see how that'd simplify anything - if they can do it they can... And I'd actually give priority to making AA repairable over time, just to get rid of the "boohoo infinite planes" argument...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
1,337 posts
10,412 battles
36 minutes ago, Colonel_Boom said:

In my opinion all modules should be repairable to some degree.

I am not in favor. Attrition is part of the game. If a ship is being hit by numerous salvos her fighting capacity should be reduced. I do understand that this is an arcade game, but, a certain degree of realism should be maintained. 

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AP-]
Players
2,561 posts
6,319 battles
5 minutes ago, Saltface said:

I am not in favor. Attrition is part of the game. If a ship is being hit by numerous salvos her fighting capacity should be reduced. I do understand that this is an arcade game, but, a certain degree of realism should be maintained. 

 

 

Then again tho, it impacts some builds heavily while barely scratching other builds. AA builds and especially secondary builds gets punished heavily, both of which id say arent exactly competative to begin with in the current meta.

 

Anyways, the way id do it, is make it so that damage-con is the only way to repair permanently broken modules, that way you open yourself up to fires and floodings whenever you choose to repair stuff, so you have to do it in safety. Id also make it so that damage con can only repair modules when you are not on fire/flooding, so that you actually have to sacrifice a cooldown to repair, rather than getting repaired every time you put out a fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TORAZ]
Beta Tester
13,905 posts
19,732 battles

I would just like to note that AA health has been buffed so hard a machine gun seems to have more HP than a high tier DD turret nowadays.

So if you want to make such modules repairable they should also be reverted back to their previous HP values.

 

Personally I always thought "destroyed" AA guns should be temporarily disabled then continue to function at reduced efficiency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[XTREM]
Players
1,688 posts
13,813 battles

My going-to-be unpopular opinion is this: Leave it as is

Maybe I'm just old and don't like change, but I don't have a problem with the way the modules work currently. 

 

Except for that time my Des Moines had both its front turrets completely totalled with one salvo in CB long ago :Smile_bajan2:

 

If you think it's something worth changing however, more power to you

 

-----------------------------------------------------

 

For the purposes of discussion, how about this:

 

Completely destroyed modules can repair themselves over time, but when brought back online, function at a reduced efficiency compared to its undamaged state. If we consider a main gun turret, this could affect its reload, traverse,  or accuracy for the rest of the match

 

Don't kill me, OK? I'm just an old man

 

@Saltface Pretty much my thoughts exactly

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
725 posts
12,174 battles
3 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

temporarily disabled then continue to function at reduced efficiency.

That is good option too. It works for tanks it can work for ships.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
1,337 posts
10,412 battles
7 minutes ago, Miragetank90 said:

@Saltface Pretty much my thoughts exactly

I m old mature!! We don't grow old mate we mature like good whiskey.

 

Regards

Saltface

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KAKE]
Players
2,567 posts
6,182 battles

Permanent module destruction to me always felt like a pointless nod to realism in a game that otherwise doesn't give much of a :etc_swear: about realism. Something that seemed like a good idea at the time, but now only adds meaningless randomness and irritation to the game.

 

I suspect nobody here would feel it was a loss if they never had to go through another game with a destroyed torpedo launcher on their torpedo focused DD or a destroyed turret on their Richelieu/Richelieu mk II.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BHSFL]
Players
3,690 posts
13,521 battles

You guys could just take the ship module "Auxilary Armements Modification 1" and preventive maintenance captain skill ?

 

Or wanna have those advantages without it costing other choices eh ?

  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AP-]
Players
2,561 posts
6,319 battles
27 minutes ago, Beastofwar said:

You guys could just take the ship module "Auxilary Armements Modification 1" and preventive maintenance captain skill ?

 

Or wanna have those advantages without it costing other choices eh ?

You can run both those modules, get dropped twice by a carrier, and your aa is down to 50%....

 

Which is a problem, because the carrier can drop you all day long, nothing is gonna stop him. In my experiences, fire prevention and BoS is actually more useful to counter carriers than aa skills, which is just stupid.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
8,169 posts
9,048 battles
13 hours ago, thiextar said:

Holy tomato juice that would be awesome and completely terrifying at the same time.

Put some bot teams in training room to fight each other in torp boats. Then the prospect of automated torp tubes is more terrifying than awesome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
3,810 posts
17,948 battles
21 hours ago, Beastofwar said:

You guys could just take the ship module "Auxilary Armements Modification 1" and preventive maintenance captain skill ?

 

Or wanna have those advantages without it costing other choices eh ?

 

If I'm not mistaken, PM doesn't work for secondaries / AA mounts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BABBY]
Players
695 posts
10,435 battles
21 hours ago, Beastofwar said:

You guys could just take the ship module "Auxilary Armements Modification 1" and preventive maintenance captain skill ?

 

Or wanna have those advantages without it costing other choices eh ?

I encourage you to NOT take main armaments mod on ships like Richelieu, JB and especially Dunkerque so you can enjoy the giant torpedo mode because that's what your ship will be reduced to every few battles.

And PM doesn't affect AA and sec mounts.

That said part of me wants to leave the permadamage in because it adds some interesting flavour to the game even when it happens to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Quality Poster
4,445 posts
15,746 battles

Hi all,

 

2 hours ago, lup3s said:

 

If I'm not mistaken, PM doesn't work for secondaries / AA mounts.

 

Yes - that is 100% correct!

 

Why?

 

Because those can only be in state "OK" / "Destroyed" and "Preventive Maintenance" can only work for stuff that can get damaged and repaired...

 

 

Leo "Apollo11"

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[KAKE]
Players
2,567 posts
6,182 battles

Does preventive maintenance do anything besides reduce the risk of modules becoming temporarily knocked out? Does it reduce the risk of them being permanently disabled? Because I thought that was just a question of module hit points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BHSFL]
Players
3,690 posts
13,521 battles
6 hours ago, lup3s said:

 

If I'm not mistaken, PM doesn't work for secondaries / AA mounts.

 

I only mentioned it because the topic is on "modules"

 

For AA modules specificly that would be "Auxilary Armements Modification 1" you should be taking when concerend over their durability.

 

Ofcourse a player is free to have the opinion that is a waste of a ship module, but then again priorities priorities......you HAVE the option to make them less vulnerable already. Wether or not you use it is your own buisiness. Compaining about AA vulnerability is anidication this option was overlooked.

 

If it was not overlooked it is a cheap way of saying "" i want less vulnerable AA but i don't want to sacrifice anything else for it" and then hey...why should anyone listen to that ?

 

I for one hope that module is not "discovered" by too many players, or re evaluated to not be a "waste" as my CV's become very powerful mid-late match when players not mount those. And my lost aircraft costs do not rise as punishing high as well. This is all part of the games design as well. You have an option to be not so vulnerable to aircraft, but it will cost you in other things you could do.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×