The state of the game

[Redwing6891]

I find the games that are currently played, for example in tier VII entirely unsatisfactory. You get uptiered to tier IX most of the time, and then the game is the warships version of a Mexican standoff - without CVs. Camping ships throwing shells at each other from the start line. Dull with a capital D.

 

CVs get a lot of hate but at least if they are present, ships have to keep on moving. I found in one game that three (!) battleships were huddling behind one island. Come on - what is that all about?

 

What can we do to make the game a bit more like naval warfare? I mean that is why I got attracted to it in the first place. I am really sorry but I don't want to play World of Tanks in ship skins or World of Hide and Seek.

 

Any suggestions?

 

[triumphgt6]

I imagine the Dutch Airstrike consumable was designed to reduce this - not sure how successful it has been and groups of battleships are likely to fall prey to marauding subs. However, like you, I would prefer WOWS to be rather more naval - maybe penalties for actually stopping - ? reduced dispersion of shells fired at stationary targets - I don't remember many real battles  with ships reversing slowly nose in. But this is an arcade game - maybe we need to look elsewhere. 

[Padds01]

its not a mystery its fairly simple design. This is the game the devs want, well actually i think design is driven by sales. 

 

but to fix it? well if we define fix as making the game more close range more about huge metal boats throwing car sized lumps of  metal into each other..

 

well then go read any one of the posts in other threads about this going back two years + no offence but i realise i cant be bothered to try and sow these seeds in infertile soil again, if WG ever give any indication they want to make the game a bit more interesting we can go through it again, Im off to play the ascent not lament about not playing this.

 

 

[Pandafaust]

18 minutes ago, Redwing6891 said:

What can we do to make the game a bit more like naval warfare?

Hugely decrease the accuracy of all weapons, implement semi-random breakdowns involving a return to port and 6 month refit period, and almost completely remove the Soviet lines.  Oh, and ocean for every map.

[SV_Kompresor]

12 minutes ago, triumphgt6 said:

I imagine the Dutch Airstrike consumable was designed to reduce this - not sure how successful it has been and groups of battleships are likely to fall prey to marauding subs. However, like you, I would prefer WOWS to be rather more naval - maybe penalties for actually stopping - ? reduced dispersion of shells fired at stationary targets - I don't remember many real battles  with ships reversing slowly nose in. But this is an arcade game - maybe we need to look elsewhere. 

It probably would've been much more effective if players enjoyed playing those ships.

[Lebedjev]

24 minutes ago, Redwing6891 said:

What can we do to make the game a bit more like naval warfare?

 

Learn to read a map.

[Ronchabale]

9 minutes ago, Padds01 said:

 This is the game the devs want, well actually i think design is driven by sales. 

 

Sell new balanced ship = meh, not much $ earned

Sell new OP ship  = $

Sell new mediocre ship with gimmick attached = $

Introduce new map = Cost $ but no increase in $ earned

Introduce new class = Initial good $ before more meh

Rework some part of game = Everyone needs to re-spec their commanders = $

Etc.

 

Money is what makes the world go round (especially in WG:s world)

 

[Pikkozoikum]

37 minutes ago, Redwing6891 said:

I find the games that are currently played, for example in tier VII entirely unsatisfactory. You get uptiered to tier IX most of the time, and then the game is the warships version of a Mexican standoff - without CVs. Camping ships throwing shells at each other from the start line. Dull with a capital D.

There should be a matchmaker condition, that you get only like 30% of the games bottom tier, or 40% I don't remember. But there was also a condition, that you need to play at least 20 games with that ship or something

 

38 minutes ago, Redwing6891 said:

CVs get a lot of hate but at least if they are present, ships have to keep on moving. I found in one game that three (!) battleships were huddling behind one island. Come on - what is that all about?

That's something I also like about CVs, but also that you don'r depend that much on your DDs

 

39 minutes ago, Redwing6891 said:

What can we do to make the game a bit more like naval warfare? I mean that is why I got attracted to it in the first place. I am really sorry but I don't want to play World of Tanks in ship skins or World of Hide and Seek.

Depends on what you mean with Naval Warfare. It's an arcade ship shooter, something like that. If you want real Naval Warfare, then you have to play some single player games, those have that more likely. And War Thunder is a bit more realistic, though the game modes are quite weak, only EC is kinda nice, but rarely available

 

[lovelacebeer]

The match making issue of often being bottom tier I know is an older discussion and I cannot personally see that changing anytime soon. 
 

Although I’m very surprised that the OP finds CVs encourage movement, it’s been my experience that they cause quite the opposite. Well save for people who sail around the back of the map swapping flanks but that’s another issue. I see a lot more active and aggressive play when there isn’t a CV present.

[Redwing6891]

3 hours ago, Lebedjev said:

 

Learn to read a map.

Sorry, I don't get your point. Would you care to elaborate?

[Karasu_Browarszky]

There isn't much to write home about currently.

 

The game is somewhat viable in operation, coop, and random on tiers 5 to 7. Higher up, we mostly get into PITA territory. Oh... and isn't it funny, how every time you try to actually carry out either an evasive or an offensive maneuver with your ship, there's an effing rock right exactly where you intend to turn. How they do it? Seriously, how the **** do the WG devs know the exact locations on every map where you decide to turn the helm......

[Lebedjev]

2 hours ago, Redwing6891 said:

Sorry, I don't get your point. Would you care to elaborate?

 

Yes.

If you end up, in a "Mexican standoff" (the thing you dislike), you probably make this choice.

 

You probably was driving a cruiser, hard to said witch one, but if it's the case, what the problem ?

If it's your BB, yeah it's kinda sad... but if it's your foe, they could be free food or being useless for their team, overguarding a sector, so no point to engage them.

 

I don't know what really happen during this battle, but sometime a quick look to the map is enought to break a stalemate.

 

 

 

[xe_N_on]

Vor 9 Stunden, Redwing6891 sagte:

I find the games that are currently played, for example in tier VII entirely unsatisfactory. You get uptiered to tier IX most of the time, and then the game is the warships version of a Mexican standoff - without CVs. Camping ships throwing shells at each other from the start line. Dull with a capital D.

 

CVs get a lot of hate but at least if they are present, ships have to keep on moving. I found in one game that three (!) battleships were huddling behind one island. Come on - what is that all about?

 

What can we do to make the game a bit more like naval warfare? I mean that is why I got attracted to it in the first place. I am really sorry but I don't want to play World of Tanks in ship skins or World of Hide and Seek.

 

Any suggestions?

 

Play DDs, much more dynamic gameplay.

[_Lupastro_]

9 ore fa, Pandafaust ha scritto:

and ocean for every map.

This... Well not every map but just more maps with open waters and less islands

[Panocek]

32 minutes ago, _Lupastro_ said:

This... Well not every map but just more maps with open waters and less islands

Which in turn screws entire class of cruisers except select few vessels that are suitable for open water "just dodge" shenanigans.

[MementoMori_6030]

Vor 10 Stunden, Redwing6891 sagte:

What can we do to make the game a bit more like naval warfare?

 

Any suggestions?

Remove islands, remove planes?

[SodaBubbles]

11 hours ago, Redwing6891 said:

CVs get a lot of hate but at least if they are present, ships have to keep on moving.

 

 

It's just the opposite: CVs make camping even worse because of their spotting, which means ships are spotted earlier, come under fire earlier, and have to turn off earlier. This makes players more cautious and delays them coming into position, worsening the spawn camping problem. Fundamentally, every effect CVs have on gameplay is pernicious. That is why the devs love them so much.

 

As for suggestions, most of the maps consist of islands across the center, with open space behind. It should really be the opposite. The maps need a spread of islands so that ships can get into position without being seen until they are at good engagement ranges. The devs should also be experimenting with spawn positions and new positions for caps. 

 

It really doesn't matter though. Once submarines arrive the camping is going to get much much worse, as any BB that moves up will be insta-killed by subs and by HE spammers. The DDs won't be able to attend to the subs because of the constant presence of CVs. Hence any solution we think up now will fail: subs are going to have a disastrous effect on the game. 

Of course, it's not like WG staff care, either. They don't play the game and don't care whether it is playable or not.

[Pukovnik7]

11 hours ago, Redwing6891 said:

CVs get a lot of hate but at least if they are present, ships have to keep on moving. I found in one game that three (!) battleships were huddling behind one island. Come on - what is that all about?

 

Nah. If CVs are present, ships turn into campers. Presence of CVs has adverse effect on literally every class:

• CV presence means that ships are permaspotted, which means that any ship which tries to push gets focused and melted down by mass HE spam, unless islands are large enough and positioned well enough to prevent that. In which case any ship which tries to push gets melted down by air attacks. But oftentimes ships cannot even get to cover before they are detected and focus-fired.
• CV attacks cannot be angled against or blocked by the islands, which means that ships have to keep moving. This limits their ability to utilize cover against other surface ships, which forces them to stay at range and prevents pushing.
• CV presence forces ships to group together for effective overlapping AA, which means that basic tactics such as crossfire and flanking are impossible. This again prevents pushing.
• CVs prevent ships from preserving their health pool in the first half of the game, which means that battleships (who are the largest, most obvious targets) are disincentivized from pushing and brawling in the late game, because to do that you need a lot of HP. But the same effect can again be seen with all ships, not just battleships.

End result is that secondary/brawler builds become basically useless for most (if not entirety) of the match as the entire match degenerates into a bunch of apes doing performance at long range. All thanks to the CV presence.

 

And that is why I keep praying for World of Ironclads: Just Ram Them.

[BanzaiPiluso]

More of that beauty of Ocean map.

[Yedwy]

1 hour ago, SodaBubbles said:

It's just the opposite: CVs make camping even worse because of their spotting, which means ships are spotted earlier, come under fire earlier, and have to turn off earlier. This makes players more cautious and delays them coming into position, worsening the spawn camping problem. Fundamentally, every effect CVs have on gameplay is pernicious.

 

That is why the devs love them so much.

1. With this I agree 100%

 

2. Its not really, the sad part is accountants are running WOWS and it shows, x amount of work hours went into CVs and popularity is low? We cant have that as that is then a failed investment buff as needed until its fixed comrade...

 

And then we end up where we end up 

[SodaBubbles]

1 hour ago, Pukovnik7 said:

Nah. If CVs are present, ships turn into campers. Presence of CVs has adverse effect on literally every class:

• CV presence means that ships are permaspotted, which means that any ship which tries to push gets focused and melted down by mass HE spam, unless islands are large enough and positioned well enough to prevent that. In which case any ship which tries to push gets melted down by air attacks. But oftentimes ships cannot even get to cover before they are detected and focus-fired.
• CV attacks cannot be angled against or blocked by the islands, which means that ships have to keep moving. This limits their ability to utilize cover against other surface ships, which forces them to stay at range and prevents pushing.
• CV presence forces ships to group together for effective overlapping AA, which means that basic tactics such as crossfire and flanking are impossible. This again prevents pushing.
• CVs prevent ships from preserving their health pool in the first half of the game, which means that battleships (who are the largest, most obvious targets) are disincentivized from pushing and brawling in the late game, because to do that you need a lot of HP. But the same effect can again be seen with all ships, not just battleships.

End result is that secondary/brawler builds become basically useless for most (if not entirety) of the match as the entire match degenerates into a bunch of apes doing performance at long range. All thanks to the CV presence.

 

And that is why I keep praying for World of Ironclads: Just Ram Them.

haha. That third point just ramifies. Not only are flanking and crossfiring difficult, but kiting to hold a flank is also impossible, especially in a cruiser, since you can't hide periodically. 

 

CVs produce a stupid, spawn-camping crapfest. 

[Pikkozoikum]

9 hours ago, Karasu_Hidesuke said:

where you intend to turn. How they do it? Seriously, how the **** do the WG devs know the exact locations on every map where you decide to turn the helm......

yes, on some maps it actually feels like, that the rocks are placed, where a player would commonly move around.

[Yedwy]

2 minutes ago, Pikkozoikum said:

yes, on some maps it actually feels like, that the rocks are placed, where a player would commonly move around.

Well if we take into account what the average player is nowadays and even more the average "me wanna sub" player they will need all the help possible to hit stuff even with homing and its much easier to hit the target if they are beached on an invisible shoal, after all otherwise the subs might end up unpopular...

[Pikkozoikum]

3 minutes ago, Yedwy said:

Well if we take into account what the average player is nowadays and even more the average "me wanna sub" player they will need all the help possible to hit stuff even with homing and its much easier to hit the target if they are beached on an invisible shoal, after all otherwise the subs might end up unpopular...

I think it was more about, that Karasu is hitting islands sometimes, and I can relate to that feeling, that sometimes Islands are exactly placed, where I would tend to stay, if there wouldn't be an island.

 

And Islands make homing torpedos actually more difficult, because the torpedos will always have a "lead" and if a ship keeps moving, the torpedos will run into an island. Also launching first torpedos and ping then often won't work, because there is mostly the option

1. Submarine pings and torpedos run into island

2. Torpedos pass island, but submarine can't ping, because ship is behind island

A gap between that is rare.

 

But the submarine will be on the unpopular side, I can tell you. Just by the nature of what a submarine is and unrelated to this game

[Redwing6891]

7 hours ago, Lebedjev said:

 

Yes.

If you end up, in a "Mexican standoff" (the thing you dislike), you probably make this choice.

 

You probably was driving a cruiser, hard to said witch one, but if it's the case, what the problem ?

If it's your BB, yeah it's kinda sad... but if it's your foe, they could be free food or being useless for their team, overguarding a sector, so no point to engage them.

 

I don't know what really happen during this battle, but sometime a quick look to the map is enought to break a stalemate.

 

 

 

I was actually driving a BB, and looking at maps won't solve anything as in a Mexican standoff the first one who blinks gets plastered. I tried 'follow me' by example but no-one did. In the end, I still got an Iowa and a Jean Bart in my tier VII KGV which was very satisfying but still...

 

I think the terminology on its own highlights the issue: sailors have charts, not maps. And the very notion that blue water ships would fight in the littoral rock formations pictured in WoWS is ridiculous to the extreme. There are plenty of rocks strewn about the Atlantic but have you ever heard of the famous sea battle of Rockall? I don't think so.

 

I understand that some like this WoT in ship skins where BBs peek out behind a rock and reverse back in the barn like a moray eel but I do not. WoWS should cater for the whole player base, so why not have an 'Ocean' game mode where us naval enthusiasts can play around in? What about an option that indicates a preference for what maps or game modes? 

 

What I do not understand is that all the introduced new game modes are essentially a re-hashing of what we have already. Where is the diversity? Where is the innovation?

 

Apologies for the rant but I am close to calling it quits. Again.