Battleship Accuracy test

[RAZ0RLIGHT]

WG... this game is in Beta and BBs are the only class which is heavily influenced by RNG (performance wise)

 

now you open up a test client, why dont you test BB accuracy extremes for about a week and look at the date you ll receive from this test?

 

even tho BBs would be 100% more accurate than now, they wouldnt be OP because people (even tho most players dont) can avoid the shells witch dodging (not driving in a straight line), same goes for Torpedos which have 0 RNG influence and arent OP at all.

 

i hope WG proves to be somewhat "intelligent" and will make such a test which is crucial in this early stage of development.

[typhaon]

Well in fact, I think even torps are influenced by RNG when it comes to damage and the chance of flooding.

And I don't have that much difficulties to make my shots count on my BBs... if course it's litte luck involved, but you even need more luck for a long range torp salvo to strike the desired target.

[Figment]

I deal about 40K on average with my BBs at tier IV as is. If you up the accuracy to be double what I got now, you also double the damage output. It would allow a lot more AP citadel hits from good shots as well, resulting in huge amounts of casualties and quicker deaths than today.

 

And those will be bad BB players who suffer the most.

[ollonborre]

I deal about 40K on average with my BBs at tier IV as is. If you up the accuracy to be double what I got now, you also double the damage output. It would allow a lot more AP citadel hits from good shots as well, resulting in huge amounts of casualties and quicker deaths than today.

 

And those will be bad BB players who suffer the most.

Yeah I would be happy with 160k average damage in my Fuso

 

Joking aside the accuracy is alright when RNG decides to not screw you over, so a slight RNG adjustment for BB's would not be unwelcome.

[RAZ0RLIGHT]

I deal about 40K on average with my BBs at tier IV as is. If you up the accuracy to be double what I got now, you also double the damage output. It would allow a lot more AP citadel hits from good shots as well, resulting in huge amounts of casualties and quicker deaths than today.

 

And those will be bad BB players who suffer the most.

 

well i also get huge average dmg when i am in a DD and shooting at enemies driving in a straight line, same goes for BBs

players just have to manouver a bit to avoid incoming fire.

 

for example i havent oneshot an enemy ship with a BB yet and my stats are far away from beeing bad

on the other hand, with my DDs i onehit enemy ships all the time.

[ThatOneDidntGoIn]

They need to change the way battleships do damage. Increase the minimum they do and decrease the maximum they do. They will balance out an improvement in accuracy,

 

However, one massive issue that I've found is that what a person is seeing on screen and what is happening on the servers are different. I suspect the accuracy problems are caused by this. You are not shooting where you think you are shooting and this is magnified over long distances.

[Khul]

They need to change the way battleships do damage. Increase the minimum they do and decrease the maximum they do. They will balance out an improvement in accuracy,

 

 

Just an aside, I would hate this. The game at least tries (when in a BB) to show an approximation of driving a giant leviathan equipped with mighty only-just-past-steampunk cannons that, though unwieldy & unreliable, are capable of levelling a fellow battleship with one (admittedly, lucky) shot.

 

Making this, I dunno, Halo or Doom or something, where you have to throw 23,344 shells on to target to get a kill & your accuracy is laser-like, would be...

 

It wouldn't be a naval game with anything like battleships, IMO. & it'd stop me playing, end of.

[Userext]

 

well i also get huge average dmg when i am in a DD and shooting at enemies driving in a straight line, same goes for BBs

players just have to manouver a bit to avoid incoming fire.

 

for example i havent oneshot an enemy ship with a BB yet and my stats are far away from beeing bad

on the other hand, with my DDs i onehit enemy ships all the time.

 

Thats because you BB captains are given a bless. You have at least 40 secs from an optimum torpedo attack to avoid it. Yet you fall into that trap

 

There is nothnig wrong with BBs except AA problems at low tiers

[Figment]

well i also get huge average dmg when i am in a DD and shooting at enemies driving in a straight line, same goes for BBs

players just have to manouver a bit to avoid incoming fire.

 

for example i havent oneshot an enemy ship with a BB yet and my stats are far away from beeing bad

on the other hand, with my DDs i onehit enemy ships all the time.

 

Yeah, but you're not performing super on your BBs right now, which isn't just down to RNG seeing as other people perform a lot better than the both of us on them. And I get winrates of over 70% on them as is. Don't see the need for higher accuracy, it'd be extremely OP.

[RAZ0RLIGHT]

 

Yeah, but you're not performing super on your BBs right now, which isn't just down to RNG seeing as other people perform a lot better than the both of us on them. And I get winrates of over 70% on them as is. Don't see the need for higher accuracy, it'd be extremely OP.

 

are you the only player in this game?

 

i have good rounds as well but they are extremely inconsistent due to RNG no other class in this game has the same problem.

 

funny how some ppl just refuse to test a BB buff... are you scared of them beeing balanced?

[Userext]

 

are you the only player in this game?

 

i have good rounds as well but they are extremely inconsistent due to RNG no other class in this game has the same problem.

 

funny how some ppl just refuse to test a BB buff... are you scared of them beeing balanced?

 

Yeah teh guys with 70k average damages with %70 winrates are scared they will be buffed sure...

[Exodude]

Wait, what?

[Figment]

are you the only player in this game?

 

i have good rounds as well but they are extremely inconsistent due to RNG no other class in this game has the same problem.

 

funny how some ppl just refuse to test a BB buff... are you scared of them beeing balanced?

 

Of course I'm not the only player in this game. Yet for some reason you think you are as you're complaining about YOUR results, because you think your RNG isn't good enough, despite other people doing a lot better under the same RNG circumstances.

 

You do not balance around mediocre or bad players, you balance around players much better than me. My performance is very consistent, with exceptional and extremely poor being the exceptions, rather than the standard.

 

Maybe your question should be. Are you scared of a challenge that you want better default accuracy?

 

 

PS: How exactly would I be SCARED of BBs if I'm performing best of all my units (save Omaha) on them as is?

 

Kawachi 8/16 (50%) - acc 27% - 33K average

Myogi 19/38 (50%) - acc 25% - 38K average

Kongo 4/6 (still stock and capt skills not active: 67%) - acc 22% - 22K average (much lower than it should be due to a couple games being phoned in the middle of IJN TB dodging -__-')

South Carolina 12/18 (67%) - 30% - 40K average

Arkansas Beta 8/12 (67%) - acc 23% - 37K average

Wyoming 24/32 (75%) - acc 25% - 46K average

 

And I kinda suck.

[YukiEiriKun]

Wait, what?

If you mean Userext's post, I think he's referring to the CV players.

But would not be the first time I get something wrong.

[Exodude]

If you mean Userext's post, I think he's referring to the CV players.

But would not be the first time I get something wrong.

 

I guess, I meant the whole thread, but that includes it I guess

[YukiEiriKun]

I guess, I meant the whole thread, but that includes it I guess

DANGIT! I really should just be quiet.

I'll try.. But I'm weak.

 

But for my defence, I'd say 70% winrate people mostly seem to be heavily CV orientated. x)

[RAZ0RLIGHT]

 

Yeah teh guys with 70k average damages with %70 winrates are scared they will be buffed sure...

 

troll more Mr. Powercreep

http://worldofwarships.eu/en/community/accounts/500814746-Userext/#tab=pvp/account-tab-ships-pvp

[Userext]

 

troll more Mr. Powercreep

http://worldofwarships.eu/en/community/accounts/500814746-Userext/#tab=pvp/account-tab-ships-pvp

 

my god you have low IQ

 

And I get winrates of over 70% on them as is. 

 

 

[RAZ0RLIGHT]

 

my god you have low IQ

 

 

 

 

and you cant stop trolling because you are scared of balanced BBs?

[Userext]

 

and you cant stop trolling because you are scared of balanced BBs?

 

i am not trolling you are the troll here. 

[Figment]

and you cant stop trolling because you are scared of balanced BBs?

 

Raz0r, some questions:

 

1. What makes you think they're not balanced right now? Your answer was: RNG

 

2. How do you explain people getting higher stats with the same RNG if the RNG makes it according to you impossible to have balance as is.

 

3. IF accuracy is increased, without reducing the amount of damage you deal with a citadel hit, do you understand that chances of obliterating enemy ships in single volleys increase significantly?

 

4. Do you realise that currently the accuracy of ships is roughly: 40-55% for DDs, 30-45% for cruisers, 20-35% for BBs, for a very good reason? Namely damage potential per volley?

 

5. What would happen if you bring the accuracy up by 20% with respect to now? You'd get 28-42% accuracy. You're already suggested to DOUBLE the accuracy (+100%). That would mean that from every shell fired, 40-70% would hit. With the amount of 10K potential hits being doubled at equal shots fired, what do you think will happen to the opposition that has units in the order of 30-50K hitpoints? What do you think would happen to the units that have 10-16K hitpoints? What do you think would happen to units with 40-97K hitpoints?

 

6. Who would benefit the most from an increase in accuracy? The ones who already hit more shots, or the ones who already hit fewer shots? Hint: 20-100% of MORE is A LOT MORE.

[Francois424]

Well, for #5.

 

The BB damage would have to be normalized to bring it n range with current cruiser full volley which fires say 5x as fast.

So of a Cruiser can do 3k per volley on avg, 5x per 30sec, so that's a 15k damage hit from BB batteries. (No citadels in the example).

So an 8 shell volley from say a Kongo, would land overall 5 overpens (5k dmg), 2 moderate 2.5k damage and one 5k hit.

 

So no more 30k instakill from 15k+ citadels, but more reliable, constant damage.

I'd be up for this in all honesty.  It would make the class much more fun to play.

[Figment]

You'd be forced to lower the damage. OP doesn't seem to want lowered damage though.

 

The alternative would be to decrease refire rates. So less shots a minute.

 

 

The point is DPS has to be around the same as it already is (as many players can get up to 150K damage as is).

[RAZ0RLIGHT]

 

Raz0r, some questions:

 

1. What makes you think they're not balanced right now? Your answer was: RNG

 

2. How do you explain people getting higher stats with the same RNG if the RNG makes it according to you impossible to have balance as is.

 

3. IF accuracy is increased, without reducing the amount of damage you deal with a citadel hit, do you understand that chances of obliterating enemy ships in single volleys increase significantly?

 

4. Do you realise that currently the accuracy of ships is roughly: 40-55% for DDs, 30-45% for cruisers, 20-35% for BBs, for a very good reason? Namely damage potential per volley?

 

5. What would happen if you bring the accuracy up by 20% with respect to now? You'd get 28-42% accuracy. You're already suggested to DOUBLE the accuracy (+100%). That would mean that from every shell fired, 40-70% would hit. With the amount of 10K potential hits being doubled at equal shots fired, what do you think will happen to the opposition that has units in the order of 30-50K hitpoints? What do you think would happen to the units that have 10-16K hitpoints? What do you think would happen to units with 40-97K hitpoints?

 

6. Who would benefit the most from an increase in accuracy? The ones who already hit more shots, or the ones who already hit fewer shots? Hint: 20-100% of MORE is A LOT MORE.

 

you somewhat have problems to properly read and unerstand it seems

 

1. yes RNG is the problem because enemies can still dodge shells easily + if 2 of your 12 shells hit you get 0-2000k dmg which is a joke for 30sec+ reload

2. i also get good rounds but they are inconsistent and more rare than with all other classes

3. another point you dont seem to understand, players can dodge shells like they dodge torpedos but unlike BB shells torpedo actually punishes the enemy for such a noob behaviour while the RNG prevents that most of the time

4. you cant compare the profiel accuracy stat of fast firing guns with slow firing guns

5. 100% more accuracy was an example to test the extreme (on the public test server for example) this way you can find the golden middle for BB accuracy

6. skill shouldnt be punished through RNG, all i can say about that.

 

Well, for #5.

 

The BB damage would have to be normalized to bring it n range with current cruiser full volley which fires say 5x as fast.

So of a Cruiser can do 3k per volley on avg, 5x per 30sec, so that's a 15k damage hit from BB batteries. (No citadels in the example).

So an 8 shell volley from say a Kongo, would land overall 5 overpens (5k dmg), 2 moderate 2.5k damage and one 5k hit.

 

So no more 30k instakill from 15k+ citadels, but more reliable, constant damage.

I'd be up for this in all honesty.  It would make the class much more fun to play.

no, citadel hits are what BBs stand for

Cruisers are for consistand damage (a dot for example) and BBs for peaks (burst damage), while currently the peaks are too rare.

 

next huge thing BBs suffer beside horrible RNG accuracy are the fires... seriously that should be altered as well.

[WhoCares01]

Razorlight, your hit rate with T3-5 BBs ranges from 25-36%, your total average is 33%, which adds T1-T5 cruisers and DDs.

 

That's ~2-4 hits per broadside of most of your ships!

 

What's your problem again?!?!?!