Why are CVs overperforming on EU only?

[Ishiro32]

@Userext
I can't believe I have to explain concept of RNG to anyone with two opposing thumbs, but oh well.

Stabilising a gun is a process of aiming when player is actively performing adjustments taking into account known fixed game mechanics. After gun is shot then random number is generated. (RNG) then this random number is thrown into the calculations which will net you some kind of result. Player has no impact on the number beeing generated hence the random in the name. There is a concept of risk managment in games like Blood Bowl which are heavy on dice roll, but in terms of WoWs and shooting a gun, there is nothing like that. 
Frankly RNG to guns was introduced mostly because no one would be able to hit anything otherwise or they would have to introduce so many helping tools that it would end up being pointless.

Honestly you are mixing a lot of things together and I will forward earlier question to you also, please tell me how lack of RNG for BB guns would result in less skill needed to perform or how adding RNG elements to CV would make playing them more competetive. 

 

 

[Userext]

@Userext

I can't believe I have to explain concept of RNG to anyone with two opposing thumbs, but oh well.

 

Stabilising a gun is a process of aiming when player is actively performing adjustments taking into account known fixed game mechanics. After gun is shot then random number is generated. (RNG) then this random number is thrown into the calculations which will net you some kind of result. Player has no impact on the number beeing generated hence the random in the name. There is a concept of risk managment in games like Blood Bowl which are heavy on dice roll, but in terms of WoWs and shooting a gun, there is nothing like that. 

Frankly RNG to guns was introduced mostly because no one would be able to hit anything otherwise or they would have to introduce so many helping tools that it would end up being pointless.

 

Honestly you are mixing a lot of things together and I will forward earlier question to you also, please tell me how lack of RNG for BB guns would result in less skill needed to perform or how adding RNG elements to CV would make playing them more competetive. 

 

I am talking about torpedoes not directly about guns

 

Do you know the musketeers? No? Go learn more about them. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musket

This weapon compared to today's weapon is a good example. As i said a more luck depending guns requires more skilled person to use it. Not everyone was able to use muskets as experienced musketeers. 

 

Edit: To add more about this. Musket was an inaccurate gun. So an accurate musketeer was more skilled than today's rifleman. Using this information in game a destroyer requires more skilled player to do good in it than a carrier.

 

[Kenliero]

Ok. I understand the point both sides are trying to make here. The other one saying it requires skill to MINIMIZE RNG, which it does, and other side saying skill matters more without RNG where player has more control over everything, which is also true... since everything is always more than only something less than everything... there simply is more stuff to skill have influence on... so... why are you even arguing about this?

[Ishiro32]

 

I am talking about torpedoes not directly about guns

 

Do you know the musketeers? No? Go learn more about them. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musket

This weapon compared to today's weapon is a good example. As i said a more luck depending guns requires more skilled person to use it. Not everyone was able to use muskets as experienced musketeers. 

 

Edit: To add more about this. Musket was an inaccurate gun. So an accurate musketeer was more skilled than today's rifleman. Using this information in game a destroyer requires more skilled player to do good in it than a carrier.

 

 

What about torps then? Please explain how RNG would make using torps require more skill.

 

Also muskets were inaccurate, but also any mistake made by the gunner was multiplied. Gun was not more difficult to shoot because it was random and luck based, but because even small things caused huge difference in result. You can not infuence true random. Modern weapons are completely different thing and comparing skill of shooting two of them is kinda stupid and saying that musketeer was more skilled than today's rifelman just because he had worse weapon is also silly. 

 

DDs are underpowered. Musket is worse weapon than rifle. Amazing, what that has to do with RNG and skill required to master them? 

 

Ok. I understand the point both sides are trying to make here. The other one saying it requires skill to MINIMIZE RNG, which it does, and other side saying skill matters more without RNG where player has more control over everything, which is also true... since everything is always more than only something less than everything... there simply is more stuff to skill have influence on... so... why are you even arguing about this?

 

There is no MINIMIZE random. You can only manage risk connected with random generetaion based on the situation. Random by the definition is not infuenced by the user.

[Lord_WC]

Ok. I understand the point both sides are trying to make here. The other one saying it requires skill to MINIMIZE RNG, which it does, and other side saying skill matters more without RNG where player has more control over everything, which is also true... since everything is always more than only something less than everything... there simply is more stuff to skill have influence on... so... why are you even arguing about this?

 

You can't minimize RNG. If RNG makes you deviate 30% off your target, you can play perfectly and still hit only 70% of the time. On the other hand if you consistently miss your shots just by a bit the same RNG will 'toss' your shots on target 30% of the time. Your skill matters that how much of this theoretical maximum of 70% accuracy you will achieve. But that's not a question of having an RNG.

 

What you can also do is to minimize the effects of RNG. Go closer for example so while the RNG offs your shots the target is so big that the deviated shells hit it also. Weighting in RNG in your decisions - your outgoing damage is lower than your on paper damage due to RNG, so you will play safer, etc. Having backup plans, so you know what to do if RNG shafts you.

 

The amount of skill needed to play perfectly vs very bad is the same in both an RNG and a non-RNG environment. The only difference is the theoretical minimum and maximum performance you can achieve and the scaling of your personal skill.

[Kenliero]

By minimizing random, I meant by decreasing it in numbers, not percentages.

 

For example taking your BB closer to enemy, decreases dispersion, which is RNG value. So effectively, you can decrease the amount of RNG.

[ironhammer500]

By minimizing random, I meant by decreasing it in numbers, not percentages.

 

For example taking your BB closer to enemy, decreases dispersion, which is RNG value. So effectively, you can decrease the amount of RNG.

 

Unfortunately getting close also lowers your Armour's effectiveness. So it is a trade off get in nice and close but risk more chances to be citadel or stay at some distance but lose out on accuracy.

[Tomy117]

CVs over performing on EU server ? Maybe because we have realise before everyone else that teamplay is not rewarding. If it was rewarding to shoot down planes there would be more CV in defensive setup and more CA escorting BB. But right now you gain more EXP and credits by firing as many shells as possible on the enemy. How can you not expect to see CA running around and CV only equipped with Dive bombers and torpedo bombers.

[Sharana]

Tirplitz sounds reasonable. The RU sales started last and now the RU forum is like "kill CV - save Tirplitz" They will also add float fighter to Tirplitz very soon. They said that was no planned, but they changed their mind after evaluating things.

[Pawndemonium]

Hell, it's about time. .p

[Userext]

 

What about torps then? Please explain how RNG would make using torps require more skill.

 

Also muskets were inaccurate, but also any mistake made by the gunner was multiplied. Gun was not more difficult to shoot because it was random and luck based, but because even small things caused huge difference in result. You can not infuence true random. Modern weapons are completely different thing and comparing skill of shooting two of them is kinda stupid and saying that musketeer was more skilled than today's rifelman just because he had worse weapon is also silly. 

 

DDs are underpowered. Musket is worse weapon than rifle. Amazing, what that has to do with RNG and skill required to master them? 

 

 

There is no MINIMIZE random. You can only manage risk connected with random generetaion based on the situation. Random by the definition is not infuenced by the user.

 

My god if you dont know what we are discussing about then dont jump into mid discussion. I said DDs require more skill because a DD captain deals with high RNG. Thus makes it the hardest class to play.

Give muskets to the today's good soldiers only couple of them will manage to hit the target. Give today's weapons to good musketeers they wont miss the target.

What i was trying to point out with this example is that a destroyer captain is like a musketeer and a CV captain is today's normal soldier. It requires less skill to hit the target with today's weapons. It required more skill to hit the target with muskets. Because muskets were inaccurate like the DDs of this game. You need more skill to be accurate/good with DDs in this game compared to any other class.

 

What they were defending was the opposite. For them because DD has more RNG than CV it requires less skill to play good in them.

[Syrchalis]

1. DD requires more skill

2. But not because of RNG. Torpedos have no RNG, wether air-dropped or destroyer, they always have the same pattern

3. RNG still reduces skill and doesn't increase it. Your example is simply wrong. A mukseteer would not have an advantage today. He can't influence the accuracy of a musket, so he doesn't have any additional skill that our soldiers lack. It's like saying firing a shotgun requires more skill than a pistol, because you have to negate the shotguns lack of accuracy - but that's the point, you can't.

4. The only reason DDs require skill is because they are bad, not RNG. If DDs were balanced they would be easy as hell. Play some T2 DD like I do for fun sometimes and you will notice how you can easily get 3-4 kills every game, because of how easy DD are when they have strong, fast reloading torpedos that only give enemies a 6 sec reaction time - aka not underpowered.

[Userext]

1. DD requires more skill

2. But not because of RNG. Torpedos have no RNG, wether air-dropped or destroyer, they always have the same pattern

3. RNG still reduces skill and doesn't increase it. Your example is simply wrong. A mukseteer would not have an advantage today. He can't influence the accuracy of a musket, so he doesn't have any additional skill that our soldiers lack. It's like saying firing a shotgun requires more skill than a pistol, because you have to negate the shotguns lack of accuracy - but that's the point, you can't.

4. The only reason DDs require skill is because they are bad, not RNG. If DDs were balanced they would be easy as hell. Play some T2 DD like I do for fun sometimes and you will notice how you can easily get 3-4 kills every game, because of how easy DD are when they have strong, fast reloading torpedos that only give enemies a 6 sec reaction time - aka not underpowered.

 

1-agreed

2-DDs have more luck based attack type. The only game influenced RNG is damage roll. But i am talking about all other stuff. the hit ratio's reason for being low(luck), Where the torpedo will hit(luck) which decides the damage done to a ship. so basically luck has more influence on a DD's attack.

3-You clearly dont know how muskets work. You can reduce the chances of missing a target with muskets. http://allthingsliberty.com/2013/07/the-inaccuracy-of-muskets/

 

The musket itself is not accurate for a variety of reasons.  One reason is the aerodynamics of the big roundball itself.  When it leaves the muzzle of the musket at a velocity of 1000 fps it immediately begins to drop due to the force of gravity.  At 25 yards it drops only one inch but at 50 yards it drops over 4 inches.  At 75 yards it drops 10 inches and at 100 yards it drops over 18 inches.  For a target at 125 yards the roundball drops 30 inches.[4]  These, of course, would be the figures if the musket could be properly aimed with sights – which as we have seen it is  impossible as it has no sights.

Another major problem with accuracy is the soldier himself.  To fire at leisure on the target range is one thing.  To face an enemy very likely within 100 yards, and perhaps much closer, would be a very different situation.  The concussion of the soldier firing on the side of our soldier would certainly interfere with his shooting skills.  And, those skills may have been minimal in the first place as live fire practice was not a continuous drill.

Today we think of the infantryman using his rifle, and in a worst case scenario, falling back on his bayonet as a last resort.  However, in the 18th century the musket was used to pave the way for the use of the bayonet.  It was the bayonet that was the real primary weapon.  As it has been said, the musket is a good handle for the bayonet.  There’s a lot of truth to that statement.

4-DDs are more luck dependent. Random Number Generator works with luck. There is nothing you can do to influence RNG but what you can do is to minimise the effect of RNG(luck)

[AnuSuaraj]

[Syrchalis]

So the musket method to increase accuracy doesnt work with todays weapons, giving them no advantage.

 

And tell me again where there is luck involved in DDs?

Torps go exactly where you shoot them

Enemies move exactly where they choose to move

There is no luck involved.

 

The problem is that your success depends on the failure of enemies. So at higher tiers where players make less and less mistakes DDs become less and less effective. There is no luck involved.

[Luckyio]

[Userext]

So the musket method to increase accuracy doesnt work with todays weapons, giving them no advantage.

 

And tell me again where there is luck involved in DDs?

Torps go exactly where you shoot them

Enemies move exactly where they choose to move

There is no luck involved.

 

The problem is that your success depends on the failure of enemies. So at higher tiers where players make less and less mistakes DDs become less and less effective. There is no luck involved.

 

Do you know what luck means? I doubt it.

Enemy chosing to stop-->unlucky you

Enemy chosing to slow down--->unlucky you

Enemy chosing ot turn---->unlucky you

Enemy engine blown up---->unlucky you

Enemy scared off--->unlucky you

Enemy dies to an ally--->unlucky you

 

From the second you dropped them to water its %100 luck to hit an enemy ship. Everything can happen without your controll from that second. That is what we call luck. I describe luck as stuff that happens without our controll. You can controll your ship. you cant controll whether those torps will hit or not. 

[Smi2k]

Well, on my side, i think EU CVs are "overperforming" because we have a) good CV captains, b) many scrubs as players (dont get offended, its not meant that way) and c) welp, could be a "older" playerbase or whatever xD

 

Thing is, i, myself dont think that CVs up to tier 9 are that overperforming, my problem lies with the Tier 10s, wich are way outta the scale but thats due to a) not enough Tier 10 Players and b) Missing balance therefore. They get matched up alot against Tier 8s and 9s. Is it surprising that they are "outperforming" under these circumstances? i dont think so, its just easy to farm Dmg for them there. Also, with the...well...more then laughable Cruiser AA in hightiers witch are only good for the defensive skills now, the only thing they really have to fear atm is a Montana, wich they also can take out pretty fast. They lose planes, yes, but for the Midway as example its like "oh, i lost some planes? nevermind, got enough reserves"

[Syrchalis]

 

Do you know what luck means? I doubt it.

Enemy chosing to stop-->unlucky you

Enemy chosing to slow down--->unlucky you

Enemy chosing ot turn---->unlucky you

Enemy engine blown up---->unlucky you

Enemy scared off--->unlucky you

Enemy dies to an ally--->unlucky you

 

From the second you dropped them to water its %100 luck to hit an enemy ship. Everything can happen without your controll from that second. That is what we call luck. I describe luck as stuff that happens without our controll. You can controll your ship. you cant controll whether those torps will hit or not. 

 

Exactly that is NOT luck. Luck is things noone has an influence on, like a dice roll. If you hit the part of a ship that is the engine because you aimed for it and then it has a 50% chance to get damaged or not - those 50% are luck. What the enemy decides is not luck, it's his decision. Decisions are the opposite of luck. You might feel like it's luck, but it's not.

 

If torpedos had a targeting system and would always hit their target, but only 10% would actually deal damage - that would be luck.

 

It's not like that though. If a ship stands still EVERY torpedo will hit and deal damage. Disabling engine or steering depends on where you hit, not luck. If a ship does not stand still it's not luck, but the other captains decisions that might lead to you missing.

 

Again so it goes through your thick skull:

Enemy decisions = NOT luck

It feels that way, because he didn't do those decisions to avoid your torpedos, but it's not RNG nor luck. It's just the ineffectiveness of DDs and dealing with that is hard, which is why playing DD feels hard.

[Userext]

Enemy decisions = NOT luck

It feels that way, because he didn't do those decisions to avoid your torpedos, but it's not RNG nor luck. It's just the ineffectiveness of DDs and dealing with that is hard, which is why playing DD feels hard.

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/luck  the things that happen to a person because of chance : the accidental way things happen without being planned

 

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/luck a combination of circumstances, events, etc., operating by chance tobring good or ill to a person:

 

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/luck Success or failure apparently brought by chance rather than through one’s own actions:

 

If your enemy moves out of your torpedoes that means you were unlucky. If your shots as a BB missed because enemy ship turned that means you were unlucky. 

[Syrchalis]

Easy to proof you wrong.

 

1. Definition is irrelevant in a game environment

2. If you turn to avoid shells or torpedos - where you lucky or skillful? Because what you are saying is anyone avoiding torpedos is LUCKY.

[Userext]

Easy to proof you wrong.

 

1. Definition is irrelevant in a game environment

2. If you turn to avoid shells or torpedos - where you lucky or skillful? Because what you are saying is anyone avoiding torpedos is LUCKY.

 

Avoiding torpedoes without seeing them is completly luck. What would you say if a bad player avoided all of your shots without even trying? Is he a good player or are you just unlucky?

 

[Syrchalis]

So and how is it skill to have your torpedos evaded by luck? It's not like you can do something about it. Where is the difference between a good and a bad DD player firing his torpedos and the enemy deciding he wants to go a different way and turning?

 

DD is only hard because they are UP, face it. Once they get buffed to be on the same level as cruisers at least they will not be any harder to play.

[specialkha]

So and how is it skill to have your torpedos evaded by luck? It's not like you can do something about it. Where is the difference between a good and a bad DD player firing his torpedos and the enemy deciding he wants to go a different way and turning?

 

DD is only hard because they are UP, face it. Once they get buffed to be on the same level as cruisers at least they will not be any harder to play.

 

Not really. As the class with the lowest armor and health, they will stay hard to play.

[Userext]

So and how is it skill to have your torpedos evaded by luck? It's not like you can do something about it. Where is the difference between a good and a bad DD player firing his torpedos and the enemy deciding he wants to go a different way and turning?

 

DD is only hard because they are UP, face it. Once they get buffed to be on the same level as cruisers at least they will not be any harder to play.

 

The diffrence between good and bad DD captain you reduce the possibility of target avoiding your torpedoes without knowing. This is the reason why low tiers are powerfull.