Invisible smoke firing - in or out?

[loppantorkel]

I mostly play US dds but I think that firing your guns from within a smoke screen is pretty weak. The only good part about it is storming in and torping the guy doing it. I've started doing it more since I got the Gearing, and yes it's powerful, but very boring and a bit trollish.

Is this feature really needed? Does it improve gameplay?

[loppantorkel]

What's the experience of tier 10 games. Gearings and Khabas staying immobile and invisible in smoke, doing significant damage to both cruisers and bbs... Good experience for the receivers? Frustrating? Is it the role that tier 10 dds should fill?

[KaraMon]

1. torp the smoke

2. more torps into the smoke

2.b) if you don't have torps on your cruiser then abandon this line and play something that can fight

3. zoom, look , see from where shells are coming , with some practice you can hit him in the smoke. in most cases 1 or 2 hits and that nasty dd in smoke stay silent and don't show you his location

4. play that OP class , do what he is doing and see how "easy" is that and how much you are helping by not knowing how to deal with enemy

[dasCKD]

1. torp the smoke

2. more torps into the smoke

2.b) if you don't have torps on your cruiser then abandon this line and play something that can fight

3. zoom, look , see from where shells are coming , with some practice you can hit him in the smoke. in most cases 1 or 2 hits and that nasty dd in smoke stay silent and don't show you his location

4. play that OP class , do what he is doing and see how "easy" is that and how much you are helping by not knowing how to deal with enemy

 

He says that he plays those 'OP' ships. He just doesn't find it fun.

[dasCKD]

I personally think it's an effective technique. With proper spotting assistance a USN destroyer in smoke can control an area almost as well as a top tiered battleship even if the damage is quite abyssmal. It's really useful for sending the enemy team scrambling to box themselves into one end of the map. It doesn't really work if the enemy has radar though, so there's that.

 

Oh yes, and my experience with tier 10 games have been horrible. Why do you ask?

[loppantorkel]

1. torp the smoke

2. more torps into the smoke

2.b) if you don't have torps on your cruiser then abandon this line and play something that can fight

3. zoom, look , see from where shells are coming , with some practice you can hit him in the smoke. in most cases 1 or 2 hits and that nasty dd in smoke stay silent and don't show you his location

4. play that OP class , do what he is doing and see how "easy" is that and how much you are helping by not knowing how to deal with enemy

None of this addresses my points. WG is changing the smoke mechanic in some upcoming patch, but we don't know how. Is firing in smoke and remaining invisible a good feature or should it be changed? 

[Lemasive]

None of this addresses my points. WG is changing the smoke mechanic in some upcoming patch, but we don't know how. Is firing in smoke and remaining invisible a good feature or should it be changed? 

 

Ships should be visible during smoke while they fire but have a reduced chance of getting hit.

[loppantorkel]

 

Ships should be visible during smoke while they fire but have a reduced chance of getting hit.

Seems better than what we have now.

[Mayv]

1. torp the smoke

2. more torps into the smoke

2.b) if you don't have torps on your cruiser then abandon this line and play something that can fight

3. zoom, look , see from where shells are coming , with some practice you can hit him in the smoke. in most cases 1 or 2 hits and that nasty dd in smoke stay silent and don't show you his location

4. play that OP class , do what he is doing and see how "easy" is that and how much you are helping by not knowing how to deal with enemy

 

The CAs that don't have torpedoes have Radar. Which makes smoke useless.

[Spellfire40]

Seems better than what we have now.

 

​Why? because you cant raBEEEP them easy? As if a few 127 mm hurt anybody. I lagh my aBEEEP off each tome some BBs complyin about us DDs invis fire. when tehy avoiding it at longer range like a plage while geting 15 K citadels from other BBs all the time ,-)). Trivia a DD has to hit 20 times to make up for a normal BB Pen a DD has to hit 60 plus time including fire to make up for a single BB Cit. on a VERY good game you get 200+ hits most of the time 60 to 150. Close range smoke Shooting is the only time a US DD geht's a decent number of hits ,-)))

[dasCKD]

 

Ships should be visible during smoke while they fire but have a reduced chance of getting hit.

 

I think it'll be overall a negative change to the already relatively weak destroyer class. It is currently possible to hit those ships inside of smoke if you are a sufficiently good player (I'm not) and high tiered battles already have many tools that can be used against destroyers in smoke screens. The only change to smoke that I would like to see are the following:

• Being inside of a smoke screen reduces your visibility by a percentage instead of completely hiding you unless someone is within assured acquisition range. That way firing from inside of the smoke can still reveal you earlier, but it won't make you visible at anywhere near the kinds of range that  firing outside of a smoke screen would.
• Firing your AA guns at a plane from inside of a smoke screen should make you visible. More of a MK problem than a destroyer problem, but still.
• Have some indication that the smoke screen is fading or change the information tab on the smoke charge to mention the longevity of the smoke.
• Display smoke screens on the minimap.

[AnotherDuck]

Smoke doesn't need nerfing. If you have trouble with it, get a radar ship.

 

I find that the more useful feature about invisifiring from smoke isn't the actual damage you do, but the threat you present by just being there, as larger ships know there might come torpedoes their way. Just asserting your presence can do wonders to keep others away.

[loppantorkel]

Smoke doesn't need nerfing. If you have trouble with it, get a radar ship.

Regardless of people having trouble with it or not, it could still be a bad gameplay mechanic as it is. Shima torps were nerfed for that reason, I'm betting they are looking at invisifiring as well. Too cheap and too boring for the employer of this and too frustrating for the opponent. Dds shouldn't be encouraged to stay still in smoke for offensive firing, imo. Radars could be revised as well with new smoke mechanics.

[AgarwaenME]

Regardless of people having trouble with it or not, it could still be a bad gameplay mechanic as it is. Shima torps were nerfed for that reason, I'm betting they are looking at invisifiring as well. Too cheap and too boring for the employer of this and too frustrating for the opponent. Dds shouldn't be encouraged to stay still in smoke for offensive firing, imo. Radars could be revised as well with new smoke mechanics.

 

Shima's, along with most mid to high tier DDs can still fire torps from stealth.

 

And the reason the torps got nerfed weren't because they could fire from stealth, as clearly all of those ships still can, but to try to reduce the numbers of those ships played, particularly as people perceive those numbers to be, as in highly inflated, (as it's this, not actual performance that was the key there).

 

Also firing from smoke has severe limitations, as you need someone else to spot for you, and a DD sitting still in smoke is an easy torp target (or even to just head into smoke and massacre).

 

Fact of the matter is, ships have difference defenses, and removing smoke as it is would be just like reducing BB ranges by 30-50% or removing a huge chunk of their hp and/or armour. Calling one defense cheap in comparison to something else, particularly one with clear limitations and drawbacks, and a cooldown (which puts the skillcap on it higher) over another defense like passively having 10x the effective hp is laughably biased.

[Mayv]

 

Fact of the matter is, ships have difference defenses, and removing smoke as it is would be just like reducing BB ranges by 30-50% or removing a huge chunk of their hp and/or armour. Calling one defense cheap in comparison to something else, particularly one with clear limitations and drawbacks, and a cooldown (which puts the skillcap on it higher) over another defense like passively having 10x the effective hp is laughably biased.

 

It would be more like removing BB heal or making it significantly worse.

[AgarwaenME]

 

It would be more like removing BB heal or making it significantly worse.

 

Ah yes possibly. How about this, if you get fired upon and take damage while using repair works.. the repair stops, that would be fair for sure? I mean, clicking on cooldown after taking a bit of damage to effectively double your already twice as much hp as anyone else just has to be "cheap" and "boring".

[AnotherDuck]

Ah yes possibly. How about this, if you get fired upon and take damage while using repair works.. the repair stops, that would be fair for sure?

 

Or How To Encourage Camping. "I took some damage. Gotta head out of range and heal up."

[Capra76]

None of this addresses my points. WG is changing the smoke mechanic in some upcoming patch, but we don't know how. Is firing in smoke and remaining invisible a good feature or should it be changed? 

 

Firing from smoke is the other side of the mechanic that seriously hurts DD, namely spotted by one = spotted by all, I'm not sure why DD should be stopped from exploiting this mechanic when everyone else uses it against them.

 

Personally I think firing from smoke is not worth it in a game where almost every cruiser has torpedoes and there are usually plenty of hidden DD about as well, against anything but a T6/7 USN CA you're just giving your position away and doing minimal damage in return.

[AgarwaenME]

 

Or How To Encourage Camping. "I took some damage. Gotta head out of range and heal up."

 

Indeed, unforseen consequences from stupid changes have been and will continue to be many.

[loppantorkel]

 

Shima's, along with most mid to high tier DDs can still fire torps from stealth.

 

And the reason the torps got nerfed weren't because they could fire from stealth, as clearly all of those ships still can, but to try to reduce the numbers of those ships played, particularly as people perceive those numbers to be, as in highly inflated, (as it's this, not actual performance that was the key there).

 

Also firing from smoke has severe limitations, as you need someone else to spot for you, and a DD sitting still in smoke is an easy torp target (or even to just head into smoke and massacre).

 

Fact of the matter is, ships have difference defenses, and removing smoke as it is would be just like reducing BB ranges by 30-50% or removing a huge chunk of their hp and/or armour. Calling one defense cheap in comparison to something else, particularly one with clear limitations and drawbacks, and a cooldown (which puts the skillcap on it higher) over another defense like passively having 10x the effective hp is laughably biased.

I know this. The point was that how Shimas were used made high tier games bad. They changed/nerfed it, which made tier 10 games better. Lots of Gearings now instead and another mechanic that is exploited, not to the same extent, but is the exploited mechanic a good mechanic or could it be changed for something more appropriate? Removing smoke isn't suggested here. Smoke is a good mechanic that dds need. I think the contrasts are too great though and that smoke should cover you to different degrees or something. If choose to you start shooting you could become visible but have a 50% lower hit chance, same with radars - become visible in smoke but still lower hit chance. It doesn't need to be an on/off button. Stop shooting and you become invisible again. 

..and I didn't call (smoke) defence cheap. You must have misread something.

...

Personally I think firing from smoke is not worth it in a game where almost every cruiser has torpedoes and there are usually plenty of hidden DD about as well, against anything but a T6/7 USN CA you're just giving your position away and doing minimal damage in return.

I pretty much agree, but I'd say from Kiev and up + Gearing it's substantially more effective and for these dds it's a given tactic that you need to exploit to be competitive. I just don't like it. It's a personal preference, but trying to look at the mechanic objectively, it just seems pretty weak. Countered by radars, which also is something that probably could be implemented in a better way.

[EsaTuunanen]

I just don't like it. It's a personal preference, but trying to look at the mechanic objectively, it just seems pretty weak.

Unlike ease of gunnery/hitting buffed something like ten times from reality of that era?

If players were actually required to manually deduct range to target and move gun elevation for hitting to aiming point destroyers would have some survivability without smoke or stealth.

 

 

Gearings and Khabas staying immobile and invisible in smoke

Right now basically stopping is only guaranteed way to always actually stay hidden when using smoke.

Server load optimizations and "rendering fix" caused that:

Smoke used to deploy at ~5 s interval but now new smoke puff is generated only if you move enough from previous puff.

So if you don't move fast enough you'll miss next "scheduled" smoke puff.

But if you move out from first puff and get detected (thanks to "rendering fix") enemies can still see you three seconds after you would finally get hid by new smoke puff.

 

And of course that sitting stationary exposes to torpedoes if any torpedo carrying ship is nearby.

 

[loppantorkel]

Unlike ease of gunnery/hitting buffed something like ten times from reality of that era?

If players were actually required to manually deduct range to target and move gun elevation for hitting to aiming point destroyers would have some survivability without smoke or stealth.

 

 

Right now basically stopping is only guaranteed way to always actually stay hidden when using smoke.

Server load optimizations and "rendering fix" caused that:

Smoke used to deploy at ~5 s interval but now new smoke puff is generated only if you move enough from previous puff.

So if you don't move fast enough you'll miss next "scheduled" smoke puff.

But if you move out from first puff and get detected (thanks to "rendering fix") enemies can still see you three seconds after you would finally get hid by new smoke puff.

 

And of course that sitting stationary exposes to torpedoes if any torpedo carrying ship is nearby.

 

The first paragraph only seem to concern balance. I'm not arguing for a direct nerf of high tier dds. Just a changed mechanic. The Russian dds will probably need to be buffed in some way if they can't stealth fire from smoke as they do now.

 

The second paragraph is about another bad mechanic. Two bads doesn't equal good.

[Ictogan]

I know this. The point was that how Shimas were used made high tier games bad. They changed/nerfed it, which made tier 10 games better. Lots of Gearings now instead and another mechanic that is exploited, not to the same extent, but is the exploited mechanic a good mechanic or could it be changed for something more appropriate? Removing smoke isn't suggested here. Smoke is a good mechanic that dds need. I think the contrasts are too great though and that smoke should cover you to different degrees or something. If choose to you start shooting you could become visible but have a 50% lower hit chance, same with radars - become visible in smoke but still lower hit chance. It doesn't need to be an on/off button. Stop shooting and you become invisible again. 

..and I didn't call (smoke) defence cheap. You must have misread something.

I pretty much agree, but I'd say from Kiev and up + Gearing it's substantially more effective and for these dds it's a given tactic that you need to exploit to be competitive. I just don't like it. It's a personal preference, but trying to look at the mechanic objectively, it just seems pretty weak. Countered by radars, which also is something that probably could be implemented in a better way.

 

Even with the chance of being hit being reduced by 50%, it would make using smoke for firing out of it useless. And the 3s delay to becoming invisible after not being detected anymore made using smoke for running away kinda useless, so the only reason that would remain for using smoke would be if you wanted to sit still in it, but not firing your guns.

 

The first paragraph only seem to concern balance. I'm not arguing for a direct nerf of high tier dds. Just a changed mechanic. The Russian dds will probably need to be buffed in some way if they can't stealth fire from smoke as they do now.

 

The second paragraph is about another bad mechanic. Two bads doesn't equal good.

 

So US DDs wouldn't need to be buffed in some way if their smoke firing was taken away?

[AgarwaenME]

I know this. The point was that how Shimas were used made high tier games bad. They changed/nerfed it, which made tier 10 games better. Lots of Gearings now instead and another mechanic that is exploited, not to the same extent, but is the exploited mechanic a good mechanic or could it be changed for something more appropriate? Removing smoke isn't suggested here. Smoke is a good mechanic that dds need. I think the contrasts are too great though and that smoke should cover you to different degrees or something. If choose to you start shooting you could become visible but have a 50% lower hit chance, same with radars - become visible in smoke but still lower hit chance. It doesn't need to be an on/off button. Stop shooting and you become invisible again. 

..and I didn't call (smoke) defence cheap. You must have misread something.

I pretty much agree, but I'd say from Kiev and up + Gearing it's substantially more effective and for these dds it's a given tactic that you need to exploit to be competitive. I just don't like it. It's a personal preference, but trying to look at the mechanic objectively, it just seems pretty weak. Countered by radars, which also is something that probably could be implemented in a better way.

 

No, there were no "misreading", "too cheap" is the exact words you used. Much like you now use "exploit". All loaded words which shows your bias. And keeping a DD visible even with larger dispersion will make smoke more or less entirely pointless, as a large part of smoke use is to cover a retreat or in other way make it hard for the opponent to know where you are, not to mention that saturating your position with HE makes a minor dispersion nerf against you worth next to nothing.

 

As it is, and as we expected and predicted, as soon as one thing got nerfed, then the same brigade would come and demand something else would be nerfed. As such you're perfectly in line with that.

 

Also, as DDs already are the ships with the lowest survivability in the game, which nerfs to other ships survivability are you suggesting to go hand in hand with this? Our proposals to nerf BB heals sounds good to you? How about we remove repair party entirely from CAs? Reduce dispersion when attacking larger ships? You can't possible be so deluded that you think a nerf to only DD survivability in any way is balanced right?

[AgarwaenME]

The first paragraph only seem to concern balance. I'm not arguing for a direct nerf of high tier dds. Just a changed mechanic. The Russian dds will probably need to be buffed in some way if they can't stealth fire from smoke as they do now.

 

The second paragraph is about another bad mechanic. Two bads doesn't equal good.

 

If you don't understand how this is a direct nerf, then you have no understanding of DD play at all.