Discussion thread for "some interesting info around the world"

[WolfGewehr]

@Horin728

 

Quote

Personal note, please discuss in the appropriate topic, should I keep posting these?

 

Yes please, it's good to have all info on one place. Also personally I can't be arsed to read something from Facebook.

[Spellfire40]

9 hours ago, mtm78 said:

You should be rewarded for flanking, but you just don't rush to launch fished right away you first focus on cap's and getting a pressure advantage on enemy team and then you try and get those rewarding flank shots. What I mean is, flanking shots can land most damage but are hard to get off ( aka launch.. ). If you make DD capable of continously sending waves of long range torps to bow on battleships AND be effective at that, what happens if you DO get to a BB's broadside? Considering they work bow on, getting those same torps in a broadside situation would certainly not be balanced. 

 

IJN torps are fine anti BB weapons IF NOT for their crappy concealment. But WG is afraid that better concealment influences all classes not just BB's. I died to many IJN torp in my DD's, even with worse concealment in the areas you fight it's just not always possible to avoid them all. Getting better concealment on them alone would make this more frequent and WG does not want this. Shima ofc is already the DD with the most torpedo DD kills. 

 

So why not keep 12km range ( or make it 15km, it still makes me throw up a bit inside that Japan, the nation which actually made working torpedoes during the war, have worse torpedoes as USN which had major issues during their development program   ), but make them more stealthy and make them ONLY hit capital ships ( BB / CV ). Historical, heck no, draft based is more 'immersive' but it's also imho just plain stupid and not even worth considering. And I will be happy when even THAT comes out as true in the end. 

 

 

The problem with conceilment like vs CAs with deepwater Torps is you are too good agist unintended Targets. There is allready a DD line that can kill BBs quite good despite their Torp damage being crappy really and that are German DDs that thanks to their reload actually can get föooding on bow on targets stick. Of course they pay with rather bad conceilment..... Well 1st leaks were rather strange  i dont know were that is going to end platforms with the T10 geting yugumo level of stealth and Gering guns....,,,, we really need BB hunter with better than Torp boat stealth insane short range gun DPS and a specalized weapon ? That sounds like what they did to the RN lines with their radar on top of all what is now on them.

 

I wonder if it is so hard to lower Torp aquisition for one class only......since there is a skill that ups it. BBs that actually play with their team would have warning. CA wouldnt get screwed over with even less reaction time and the weapon would work on anbody not forcing pan asia to throw their anti smoke torps out of the window for a very limited usable anti BB weapon.

 

Of corse that would mean we have a DD line without a gimik and WG cant have that.....

[Kartoffelmos]

10 hours ago, Spellfire40 said:

This Torps are just anti CA torps nothing more nothing less. And we really need more things that kills off crusiers that actally allready risking geting one shoted from BBs for doing their Job and going after DDs do we?

 

Indeed:

On 9.8.2017 at 1:06 PM, Kartoffelmos said:

Considering that most cruisers are sailing closer to the destroyers (both hostile and friendly), I'm worried that a possible consequence is that these new torpedoes will be better at hitting cruisers than battleships. The idea seems good though, so I guess testing will highlight possible issues.

 

I could see this becoming a feature of the IJN DDs though: instead of the wide spread (who uses this anyway?), the destroyers can launch "deep-water" torpedoes that detonates only when hitting battleships (and are harder to detect). That way, the players have two options ingame:

1. A general-purpose torpedo which is fast but is somewhat lacking in the detectability department.
2. A specialised anti-BB weapon that is difficult to detect and is much more likely to reach the intended target. The trade-off is that it is useless against everything else.

In my opinion, this might make IJN DDs great again(TM) and could potentially bring them to the front as anti-BB destroyers.

 

The problem with the PA DDs is that their supposed weakness is countered by them being US clones. As such, they should be good in a DD-on-DD engagement and thus the only real drawback of the DW-torpedoes is the lack of anti-smoke (RN CLs excluded) utility.

[blanc091]

9 hours ago, mtm78 said:

it still makes me throw up a bit inside that Japan, the nation which actually made working torpedoes during the war, have worse torpedoes as USN which had major issues during their development program  

 

 

Hahah, ^ that :))

[Culiacan_Mexico]

15 hours ago, mtm78 said:

...make them ONLY hit capital ships ( BB / CV )...

 

 

This is the torpedo that is needed, but it must also be able to be selected in battle with a reasonable delay in swapping torpedo types.

 

For balancing, this would allow WG to adjust damage, reaction time, range, etc with its effect against a single type of ship... BBs.

[Horin728]

2 hours ago, Culiacan_Mexico said:

This is the torpedo that is needed, but it must also be able to be selected in battle with a reasonable delay in swapping torpedo types.

 

For balancing, this would allow WG to adjust damage, reaction time, range, etc with its effect against a single type of ship... BBs.

 

Well since the RN BBs are out and are using (almost) exclusively HE and CVs are still waiting on the option to choose from HE/AP bombs I think that expecting an option to choose either deep/normal torps is rather naive.

[Culiacan_Mexico]

21 minutes ago, Horin728 said:

 

Well since the RN BBs are out and are using (almost) exclusively HE and CVs are still waiting on the option to choose from HE/AP bombs I think that expecting an option to choose either deep/normal torps is rather naive.

  Too true.

[RAHJAILARI]

I agree with mtm78 on the torp concealment, but perhaps there is a simple solution to this?

 

MAYBE, WG could make it so, that torpedoes could be spotted most easily from DD's, then Cruisers and that BB's and CV's might have the shortest torp spotting ranges, this should fix the issue without impacting all ships (it would also help improve Cruiser survivability in relation to BB).

 

Also, They could make the British torp, firing mode (you know the neat single-file thingy) available to all DD (press "3" for single file?), this would allow even the IJN DD's to fire a nice, continuous stream of torps in a very narrow spread right into the bow of a camper-BB. Instant goodbyes to bow-on camping with this one, I'm quite sure.Well OK, there are still the islands but you know what I mean...

[Reniwn]

On 14.09.2017 at 9:44 AM, RAHJAILARI said:

I agree with mtm78 on the torp concealment, but perhaps there is a simple solution to this?

 

MAYBE, WG could make it so, that torpedoes could be spotted most easily from DD's, then Cruisers and that BB's and CV's might have the shortest torp spotting ranges, this should fix the issue without impacting all ships (it would also help improve Cruiser survivability in relation to BB).

 

Also, They could make the British torp, firing mode (you know the neat single-file thingy) available to all DD (press "3" for single file?), this would allow even the IJN DD's to fire a nice, continuous stream of torps in a very narrow spread right into the bow of a camper-BB. Instant goodbyes to bow-on camping with this one, I'm quite sure.Well OK, there are still the islands but you know what I mean...

That sounds like a wonderful idea to me, but WG will never implement it just becase it is a wonderful idea.

[Culiacan_Mexico]

On 9/14/2017 at 8:44 AM, RAHJAILARI said:

...MAYBE, WG could make it so, that torpedoes could be spotted most easily from DD's...

Which would mean as a DD main, there would be one more advantage to screening for my team, thus increase my chances for winning?  I like it.

[Unintentional_submarine]

But wouldn't that also mean that on average torps would get spotted sooner? And we know from IJN that spotting torps early is a pretty harsh reduction in value. And I mean the average detection would have to go up if cruisers were supposed to have it 'better' than now. So DDs get a fair amount of better detection, cruisers somewhat more, battleships somewhat less and CV a good deal less? If cruisers just stay the same as now, they would be as troubled as ever.

 

Hence why I think that solution isn't workable.

[Culiacan_Mexico]

 

-----------

NoirLotus

News for pan asia DDs 

Hsien Yang, Chung Mu, and Hsiang Yang
Gain surveillance radar consumable on slot 3 (engine boost). This new variant has fixed detection range at 7.5 km, and last 10 seconds, 12 seconds, and 15 seconds for Tier 8, Tier 9, and Tier 10, respectively. (For comparison, Black's surveillance radar has a detection range of 7.5 km and last 20 seconds.)

--------------

[dasCKD]

3 minutes ago, Culiacan_Mexico said:

Gain surveillance radar consumable on slot 3 (engine boost). This new variant has fixed detection range at 7.5 km, and last 10 seconds, 12 seconds, and 15 seconds for Tier 8, Tier 9, and Tier 10, respectively. (For comparison, Black's surveillance radar has a detection range of 7.5 km and last 20 seconds.)

 

They did WHAT?

[Tyrendian89]

gnarf... well, at this point it's still testing - remember when RN BBs had Radar and  DefAA at one point during testing? So no way to know whether they intend to go through with this or are maybe just using these ships as a testbed for something that's never intended to go on them? Like, we havent seen a Radar with that short a duration have we? So maybe just maybe WG want to try out how that plays and then use it elsewhere if it proves workable?

 

yes yes grasping at straws leave me alone...

[Gojuadorai]

yeah no radar for germans but the pan-asian WW2 high tech armies get it...

[shadowwolf9705]

so let me put together what WG is planning if i followed the stuff right a bit:

 

- we get new DDs which are US copies with their decent Guns

- they get new Torpedos which will punish pushing Cruiser and Battleships but to Campers they are an annoyance in the last 5 mins at best and make the Endangered Species of Screening DDs even More deciding especially for getting the game to move

- and just because the are such an endangered Species they put Radar on the new DDs too so that the Species goes from endangered to extinct (well atleast it will hopefully cause many casualties on the side of the Smoke sitters)

 

and i thought we wanted to make the Game less campy and not an increase of it because this is what this will lead to in my opinion

[Verdius]

58 minutes ago, NoirLotus said:

Hsien Yang, Chung Mu, and Hsiang Yang

Gain surveillance radar consumable on slot 3 (engine boost). This new variant has fixed detection range at 7.5 km, and last 10 seconds, 12 seconds, and 15 seconds for Tier 8, Tier 9, and Tier 10, respectively. (For comparison, Black's surveillance radar has a detection range of 7.5 km and last 20 seconds.)

 

 

 

 

WG pls

STOP WITH THE GIMMICK OVERLOAD
You want to put even more gimmicks on the already gimmicky super stealthy (better than IJN) gunboats that have torps that only hit BBs and cruisers with the USN smoke?

A large section of the playerbase already hates radar in its current implementation.

[mtm78]

RADAR ON DD's....

 

[NoirLotus]

Just now, mtm78 said:

RADAR ON DD's....

 

 

Hey, WG devs said that they want to fight BB overpopulation. They must think that a good way to do that is to make DDs life a nightmare ...

[mtm78]

6 minutes ago, shadowwolf9705 said:

so let me put together what WG is planning if i followed the stuff right a bit:

 

- we get new DDs which are US copies with their decent Guns

- they get new Torpedos which will punish pushing Cruiser and Battleships but to Campers they are an annoyance in the last 5 mins at best and make the Endangered Species of Screening DDs even More deciding especially for getting the game to move

- and just because the are such an endangered Species they put Radar on the new DDs too so that the Species goes from endangered to extinct (well atleast it will hopefully cause many casualties on the side of the Smoke sitters)

 

and i thought we wanted to make the Game less campy and not an increase of it because this is what this will lead to in my opinion

 

Stop crying it's not DD's which make this campy meta it's BaBies.....

 

For comparison, there are four babies on average in high tier matches ( actually little bit more ) and only 2 destroyers. But yeah keep those tears flowing about destroyers ruining the gameplay.......  

 

1 minute ago, NoirLotus said:

Hey, WG devs said that they want to fight BB overpopulation. They must think that a good way to do that is to make DDs life a nightmare ...

 

It's a good thing my ingame clan chat isn't 'moderated by WG', I can be a lot more vocal about what I think about this concept.... 

[Verdius]

7 minutes ago, shadowwolf9705 said:

so let me put together what WG is planning if i followed the stuff right a bit:

 

- we get new DDs which are US copies with their decent Guns

- they get new Torpedos which will punish pushing Cruiser and Battleships but to Campers they are an annoyance in the last 5 mins at best and make the Endangered Species of Screening DDs even More deciding especially for getting the game to move

- and just because the are such an endangered Species they put Radar on the new DDs too so that the Species goes from endangered to extinct (well atleast it will hopefully cause many casualties on the side of the Smoke sitters)

 

and i thought we wanted to make the Game less campy and not an increase of it because this is what this will lead to in my opinion

 

Don't forget that these boats also have better concealment than the american DDs they are copying (and most DDs, even IJN in general)...

[NoirLotus]

3 minutes ago, mtm78 said:

 

Stop crying it's not DD's which make this campy meta it's BaBies.....

 

 

But when you listen to the BBabies, if they camp, it's because the naughty DD might hurt them ...

 

So it's perfectly make sense ... (in the warped mind of the devs)

[shadowwolf9705]

its not crying its facepalming, as Wg is doing stuff thats far beyond logic and just for info the campy meta comes from multiple sources from the BBs to the DDs to the matchmaking (team 1 4 radar Cruisers team 2 1radar 2 etc.) and especially a huge missing of Tutorials especially the later

 

i mean WG should seriosly rework BBs like removing the super ACCuracy of the USS BBS or making the bowtankers mor vunlerable but well its wg

[mtm78]

4 minutes ago, NoirLotus said:

 

But when you listen to the BBabies, if they camp, it's because the naughty DD might hurt them ...

 

So it's perfectly make sense ... (in the warped mind of the devs)

 

I have a replay somewhere of a 12v12 BB game on Tears of the Cruisers. There was so much action in that game, because all the battleships didn't have to worry about those nasty destroyers....

 

Actually that's a lie. The babies all went to the same islands and began corner camping like usual. 

 

1 minute ago, shadowwolf9705 said:

its not crying its facepalming, as Wg is doing stuff thats far beyond logic and just for info the campy meta comes from multiple sources from the BBs to the DDs to the matchmaking (team 1 4 radar Cruisers team 2 1radar 2 etc.) and especially a huge missing of Tutorials

 

It is crying if you claim babies don't move because of torpedoes / destroyers, since it's not true  

 

Agree with the rest though. 

[shadowwolf9705]

i did not intend say they dont move because of torpedos my intention was more like hey i like to play DDs in the role of a screening ship WG can you please not Hammer on that role more