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

Would a global damage nerf help the game?

38 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[H_FAN]
Players
470 posts
10,565 battles

Hi everybody. Im on a break from the game to wait out new meta changes and take up hobbies that have been neglected these past 3 years playing WOWS.

 

I was not having fun playing anyway. The biggest reason for that was often the team. 3 minutes in it was often decided already. One side was down several ships and had no map controle.

 

Potatoes are gonna potate... We all know this is true. Some players wont learn no matter what you do. They dont want to or cant for whatever reason.

 

My question to you fine gentlemen and ladies is if the game would be more enjoyable if ships survived longer even when misplaying. Say a 50% damage reduction across the board (including flooding and fires) or 50% HP buff to all ships. I do realize that something as extreme as that would require a lot of rebalancing.

 

Still I would like to put it out there. Would it make the game more enjoyable?

 

Take care guys, I'll miss you.

  • Cool 6
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[COMFY]
Players
234 posts
2,502 battles

I feel like a seperate Random Battle Mode would be better.

Where every single ship has round about 50% more HP so the battles are longer. (values need to be adjusted ofc)

 

 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[I-J-N]
Players
4,565 posts

The best solution to this would be realistic armour layouts. :Smile_honoring:

 

And yes, it would make the game more enjoyable because it would expand the tactical side of the game.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,245 posts
9,381 battles

I don't think as much as 50% is necessarily needed, or that a buff should be applied as a fixed percentage when the base health pools vary so much.

But leaving aside exact numbers, I do think in general survivability has been somewhat power-crept by increasing firepower. And I'm not sure this is a desirable or even intended outcome.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SKRUB]
Players
550 posts
21,119 battles

So a new meta ?

Spoiler

D5BC4A9D83D61CB24CF22CF2FF535F162ADC44D4

 

I don't understand, why give more Hp, will make the game last longer, and it's really a good thing ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[I-J-N]
Players
4,565 posts
2 minutes ago, Lebedjev said:

So a new meta ?

  Hide contents

D5BC4A9D83D61CB24CF22CF2FF535F162ADC44D4

 

I don't understand, why give more Hp, will make the game last longer, and it's really a good thing ?

 

That depends... not if it reminds you of Sea Dogs duels....:Smile_unsure:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
31 posts
2,912 battles

Would never happen.

 

So many gameplay issues could be solved by introducing new mechanics or changing existing mechanics in such a way that would as a consequence result in matches lasting longer.

 

Such as:

  • More realistic armor layouts (as mentioned above)
  • Better shell behavior (linked with Armor layouts) - I'm sure a while ago I read a thread about how due to the compressed ranges of ship engagements in game, shell arcs and general ship/gun performance is so distorted that it makes things like Turtleback Armor waaaay more effective against other ships than should be realistically possible. 
  • Introducing Island/land objectives that ships (mainly C.V's to be honest) have to bomb, capture, destroy that then give benefits to their respective teams.

In an ideal world Wargaming should re-do EVERY ship stat from top to bottom, tech tree by tech tree, tier by tier, gimmick by gimmick because right now it all seems like it's becoming a powercreeped balancing nightmare where the roles between classes and differences in tiers/tech trees are badly jumbled up.

 

Sadly this is NOT a direction Wargaming intends to go. Everything has to be fast, an arcade in a simulations clothing.

  • Cool 5
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[R3B3L]
Players
889 posts
29,467 battles
51 minutes ago, Systergummi said:

Say a 50% damage reduction across the board (including flooding and fires) or 50% HP buff to all ships.

A resolute NO.

 

An increase to TTK would dumb down the gameplay. As if we needed more of that.

(also see the reviews about the same TTK-change in some EA-game recently; no-one likes it, apart from some casuals which want to blow up stuff).

 

Today i re-installed the game completely and realized that meanwhile WG added tutorial-videos to the loading screen, so you can educate yourself on wows while waiting for download. If someone doesn´t bother to learn basic mechanics he should get blapped. Don´t reward people for being ignorant.

 

And what exactly would you like to nerf rgr flooding? It is a non-factor already.

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
65 posts
5,298 battles

I think we need and overall HP increase, by how much? no clue, but it really does feel like the powercreep has hit msot ships hard due to stuff like the kremlin coming out, not because of its overall op-nesss but just due to its guns and being able to deliver so much more dmg.. it used to be we had the yamato to overpen etc and not so many big gunned tier 10 ships are coming out, it feels like ships just get blown up left and right more and more.. and while you could say this is the player base not as good, you can look at the fact that these guns just dont care even if you play good, you can dodge and move all you want, but they just don't care about most of your armour, and with some of the new ship lines, their armour is very wonky and such such.. just explode.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SKRUB]
Players
550 posts
21,119 battles
46 minutes ago, TheSentinelGhost said:

Introducing Island/land objectives that ships (mainly C.V's to be honest) have to bomb, capture, destroy that then give benefits to their respective teams.

Such a dumb idea, next step the come back of bastion ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LEEUW]
[LEEUW]
Players
456 posts
7,327 battles

They just have to kill the HE spam meta. There is just so much HE spam in game, it's not even funny anymore. Even loads of, non RN, BB's re spamming HE these days.

 

Problem is those tomatoes think they do a good job, because they did a whooping 80k HE+firedamage to BB's. While actually they did nothing for the team, since a BB can heal all that damage back. Yet, they do blame the team for the loss. Since they did 90k damage in their T10 BB that game, instead of 40k with AP.

  • Cool 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[I-J-N]
Players
4,565 posts
40 minutes ago, Vinyl_ScratchPlays said:

I think we need and overall HP increase, by how much? no clue, but it really does feel like the powercreep has hit msot ships hard due to stuff like the kremlin coming out, not because of its overall op-nesss but just due to its guns and being able to deliver so much more dmg.. it used to be we had the yamato to overpen etc and not so many big gunned tier 10 ships are coming out, it feels like ships just get blown up left and right more and more.. and while you could say this is the player base not as good, you can look at the fact that these guns just dont care even if you play good, you can dodge and move all you want, but they just don't care about most of your armour, and with some of the new ship lines, their armour is very wonky and such such.. just explode.

 

The problem with a flat out increase in HP, IMHO, is that it will not solve the problem, only make the battles last longer for the same rewards. That, I think, is not what OP, myself and many others would want out of this game. Having typed that, I do realize the rewards would probably scale up somewhat. But again, I don't this game to be about how much xp or credits you can make, I want to be about something else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
141 posts
3,507 battles
2 hours ago, Systergummi said:

Hi everybody. Im on a break from the game to wait out new meta changes and take up hobbies that have been neglected these past 3 years playing WOWS.

 

I was not having fun playing anyway. The biggest reason for that was often the team. 3 minutes in it was often decided already. One side was down several ships and had no map controle.

 

Potatoes are gonna potate... We all know this is true. Some players wont learn no matter what you do. They dont want to or cant for whatever reason.

 

My question to you fine gentlemen and ladies is if the game would be more enjoyable if ships survived longer even when misplaying. Say a 50% damage reduction across the board (including flooding and fires) or 50% HP buff to all ships. I do realize that something as extreme as that would require a lot of rebalancing.

 

Still I would like to put it out there. Would it make the game more enjoyable?

 

Take care guys, I'll miss you.

 

I don't think increasing Time to Kill would help. WoWs is already a pretty slow paced game. And streching out the already lengthy matches would make some people fall asleep in their chairs.

 

50% dmg reduction + 50% HP buffs to ships? Well, My Nelson sure would love that. :Smile_teethhappy:

Getting citadelled through the nose almost all the time when bot tier isn't very pleasant.

Otherwise, I'm against it. This would turn ships into bullet sponges, and people would probably end up spending more on replenising ammo than paying for ship service costs from a match.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,672 posts
14,740 battles

Roflstomp matches where you can't even win with a good score because the enemy melts too fast sure are annoying, but I don't think making potatoes artificially survive longer would be a good design choice, nor do I think it would result in better gameplay. Now you'd have bismarcks sailing broadside and it'd take as long to kill them as a kremlin... not being punished for making mistakes, or being punished less, is the wrong direction imho.

 

The main source of frustration in this game always comes from the mixing of super casuals, good, and unicums all in the same MM. This isn't easily fixed, but let me try to make a suggestion which I'm not even sure if it'd work or not, but here goes...

 

It's more of a carrot (rather than stick) system of motivating players to invest effort. Imagine something called "random battle plus", or some such. It's basically random battles with a league system - you qualify for the next league by consistently performing good. Rewards are better in higher leagues, and much like clan tags changing colors the higher in leagues you go, so do player names. If someone wants to do their JuSt FoR fUn shenaningans, they can still do normal randoms, coop, or stay in the bottom league in randoms plus. Those that don't want to have a bunch of 40%ers on their team get to advance and avoid the bottom tier players, but on balance, it would also prevent them from sealclubbing much less skilled players as they'd be in a league of their peers. I guess you could described it as a hybrid of randoms, CB's and ranked, that's available all the time. Overall, I think something like this would give people options, as long as it's introduced alongside classic random battles and not replace it. A potential down side here would be divisions - if they're allowed, you'd need to division with someone who has access to the same league as yourself.

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FJAKA]
Players
2,975 posts
477 battles
2 hours ago, Systergummi said:

Hi everybody. Im on a break from the game to wait out new meta changes and take up hobbies that have been neglected these past 3 years playing WOWS.

 

I was not having fun playing anyway. The biggest reason for that was often the team. 3 minutes in it was often decided already. One side was down several ships and had no map controle.

 

Potatoes are gonna potate... We all know this is true. Some players wont learn no matter what you do. They dont want to or cant for whatever reason.

 

My question to you fine gentlemen and ladies is if the game would be more enjoyable if ships survived longer even when misplaying. Say a 50% damage reduction across the board (including flooding and fires) or 50% HP buff to all ships. I do realize that something as extreme as that would require a lot of rebalancing.

 

Still I would like to put it out there. Would it make the game more enjoyable?

 

Take care guys, I'll miss you.

games are short not becasue of high DPS but most players play too high tiers for their skill level.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-AP-]
Players
2,553 posts
6,288 battles

Not a massive surviviability buff, but just enough to offset the dpm powercreep could be good.

 

I would get the percentage buff thats needed by dividing the average dpm of all t10 ships with their most used ammo, vs the average of all t10 ships from the games release with their most used ammo.I know its not perfect(doesnt take pen, angles, shell velocity, aka effective dpm into account, but its something)

 

Then you need to fit it in so that the current percentage-based relative health between ships are the same, and you apply the total buff percentage as an average. Something like that would probably let you get away with doing it without too much rebalancing needed

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,672 posts
14,740 battles
2 minutes ago, veslingr said:

games are short not becasue of high DPS but most players play too high tiers for their skill level.

 

Yup. Had so much fun yesterday when I got a Saipan with 500 battles (and all red stats, ofc) on my team vs. a very decent Shokaku on the enemy one... They shouldn't be allowed to play high tier premiums outside of coop until they at least reach that tier with silver lines for the class they're playing. Even that would be a very generous and minimal requirement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
1,892 posts
11,654 battles

NO! A GLOBAL playerbase skill Buff is the only thing able tp help this game. Anything else is just making the bed when the house is on fire.

 

You cannot balance stupid/potatoe.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[I-J-N]
Players
4,565 posts
6 minutes ago, OldschoolGaming_YouTube said:

NO! A GLOBAL playerbase skill Buff is the only thing able tp help this game. Anything else is just making the bed when the house is on fire.

 

You cannot balance stupid/potatoe.....

 

YES we can!

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[H_FAN]
Players
470 posts
10,565 battles
1 hour ago, OldschoolGaming_YouTube said:

NO! A GLOBAL playerbase skill Buff is the only thing able tp help this game. Anything else is just making the bed when the house is on fire.

 

You cannot balance stupid/potatoe.....

But you cant have that :Smile-_tongue:

There is no way of buffing these players and WR based MM will never work.

 

So what is left to do? Carrying will probably be harder as it will be harder to destroy multiple ships. I still think that it would be more fun though. For us and for the people that usually die early in the games (jord pärena).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[THESO]
Players
576 posts
11,607 battles

You can't change DPM versus HP pool ratio alone, or at least you would need to be very careful what you wish for.

 

50-percent DPM nerf would change the game massively. Any mistakes in positioning would be punished much less. The game would likely feel dumbed-down and less exciting for any old-timer. Also, with the current parameters, the clan battles already have very protracted engagements. It's difficult to kill players that don't allow easy damage. 

 

Very bad players would still manage to throw it away, but you would just need to look at it longer. For more average players, the game would be more forgiving, but that is already available in BB and CV gameplay, as well as the lower tiers?

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,791 posts
19,103 battles

It wouldnt make the game more fun. The carriers were redesigned to do small amounts of damage over long periods of time and look how muich fun that turned out to be. It's like a chore, flying those peeshooters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NIKE]
Beta Tester
3,394 posts
7,276 battles
4 hours ago, Lebedjev said:

Such a dumb idea, next step the come back of bastion ?

I actually liked bastion.

 

Although I'm not sure if my favourite part was the game mode, or the salty tears of people nuked by an emplacement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HOO]
Players
1,900 posts
3,736 battles
5 hours ago, Systergummi said:

Hi everybody. Im on a break from the game to wait out new meta changes and take up hobbies that have been neglected these past 3 years playing WOWS.

 

I was not having fun playing anyway. The biggest reason for that was often the team. 3 minutes in it was often decided already. One side was down several ships and had no map controle.

 

Potatoes are gonna potate... We all know this is true. Some players wont learn no matter what you do. They dont want to or cant for whatever reason.

 

My question to you fine gentlemen and ladies is if the game would be more enjoyable if ships survived longer even when misplaying. Say a 50% damage reduction across the board (including flooding and fires) or 50% HP buff to all ships. I do realize that something as extreme as that would require a lot of rebalancing.

 

Still I would like to put it out there. Would it make the game more enjoyable?

 

Take care guys, I'll miss you.

I think the real issue is HE is just too damned effective, With AP you have to aim for the right places and you can try to angle and defend yourself against it

 

HE is just too easy to use, you just point and click, and wait for the fires and the damage to rack up.

 

Instead of increasing ship HP maybe another way to approach this would be to nerf fire duration and or fire chance. Fires seem to be the issue players struggle with. Another approach could be to move the fire prevention and some of the survivability captains skills to lower point values so players don't need high point captains to take them.

 

Hopefully the IFHE rework will go some way to solving these issues

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
4,505 posts
15,942 battles

I still think diving Random Battle into 2 separate modes - one Casual and one 'Competitive' that players opt in to - would solve the most glaring issues. Add reports, afk:ing or some other parameters to push players into Casual mode when needed, for a few games. Wouldn't solve everything, just make it a lot better...

  • Cool 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×