Jump to content
You need to play a total of 50 battles to post in this section.
Kazomir

Fire Mechanic Change.

46 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Players
1,458 posts
2,640 battles

Hello,  

 

I wish to propose a change in the Fire mechanics that will, in my opinion, improve gameplay.

 

First change to fires should come in a 50% damage nerf.

 

Second change, to offset this, each stack of fires increaces your main and secondary armament's dispersion by 10%.

 

 

Effect on this is twofold but serves one purpose. To reduce the BB ''KEMP BUSH'' meta that makes for current boring gameplay. The first change encourages them to push more as they wont be afraid of fire damage that much. The second change FORCES them to close the distance. Carrot AND Stick approach so to say.  This is historically accurate as well, since smoke on your ship shrouds your FCS' optics arrays and such.

 

 

Cruisers will lose some of their damage but will gain  survivability. Further to this, cruisers reliant on fire damage would get further buffs in form of more health to compensate and let them stay longer in battle to let them earn more damage.

 

All in all I think in the high tiers mistakes are punished too much as the lethality of weapons increases. This change should do something about that. Let me know if you like it!

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[4_0_4]
Players
4,343 posts
10,732 battles

When I play cruisers, I usually get hit by the stray shells of a BB salvo, increasing the dispersion while being under fire would increase this even more.

 

My main problem with fire is the sheer RNG if you get one or not. If there was a way to reliable predict when a fire is set, it would reduce the rage towards fires alot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,458 posts
2,640 battles
6 minutes ago, Zemeritt said:

When I play cruisers, I usually get hit by the stray shells of a BB salvo, increasing the dispersion while being under fire would increase this even more.

 

My main problem with fire is the sheer RNG if you get one or not. If there was a way to reliable predict when a fire is set, it would reduce the rage towards fires alot.

 

I disagree. Increasing the dispersion will make it so that the gaps between the shells (which you can squeeze through) are now wider, allowing you to WASD through the shells like a ninja runs through the rain.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[4_0_4]
Players
4,343 posts
10,732 battles
6 minutes ago, Kazomir said:

 

I disagree. Increasing the dispersion will make it so that the gaps between the shells (which you can squeeze through) are now wider, allowing you to WASD through the shells like a ninja runs through the rain.

 

The problem is: an accurate BB salvo you can predict where it'll land and avoid accordingly. IF the BBs to start shoot like shotguns, you can't really predict anymore where excatly they land.

As I said: It's always the stray shell which hits the evading cruisers, rarely it's the main salvo. By increasing the dispersion, you'll increase the stray shells and therefor increase the chance of a BB to hit an evading CA.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,458 posts
2,640 battles
20 minutes ago, Zemeritt said:

 

The problem is: an accurate BB salvo you can predict where it'll land and avoid accordingly. IF the BBs to start shoot like shotguns, you can't really predict anymore where excatly they land.

As I said: It's always the stray shell which hits the evading cruisers, rarely it's the main salvo. By increasing the dispersion, you'll increase the stray shells and therefor increase the chance of a BB to hit an evading CA.

 

Still Disagree while I get what you mean by saying stray shell cause citadels.

 

Take it this way. If dispersion is increased, there is less chance a shell would land in your vicinity, this is pure maths, which is objective as opposed to the feeling of strays always causing you citadels, which is subjective. There would be more strays for sure, but that does not mean all of them will hit you. The chance of an unlucky stray to cause a citadel would be roughly the same probably.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,458 posts
2,640 battles
2 minutes ago, GhostRider_24 said:

Current system works fine to be honest. Cant really see any point in changing it.

 

Meh, I've seen a lot of threads complaining about the high tier BB Kemp Meta. I've seen it, too. While not changing is a safe option, changing it bring the chance of more fun gameplay. Testing, ofcourse, is vital to determine if that is the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SNUBS]
Players
1,275 posts
6,708 battles

considering i get focused fired by he spamming bbs with lucky fires on me when im in my cruiser i agree with OP:Smile_hiding:

56 minutes ago, Kazomir said:

Effect on this is twofold but serves one purpose. To reduce the BB ''KEMP BUSH'' meta that makes for current boring gameplay.

But on a serious note here. if their not camping because their scared for fires. they will camp because their scared for DD torps.

and if not that its because their scared for their own reflection in the water. the only thing that will change the way how they play is them growing some balls and just move forward.

  • Cool 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[_FIN_]
Players
87 posts
2,470 battles

I like the thought process behind the idea but what if instead of accuracy and damage nerf fire (could also extend the idea to extensive ship damage etc.) put some effect on the GUI aiming tool itself, e.g., non-clear vision/shaky?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,458 posts
2,640 battles
4 minutes ago, IVemo said:

I like the thought process behind the idea but what if instead of accuracy and damage nerf fire (could also extend the idea to extensive ship damage etc.) put some effect on the GUI aiming tool itself, e.g., non-clear vision/shaky?

 

That would be too annoying. Even the current Fire effect I always remove with mods.

7 minutes ago, lameoll said:

considering i get focused fired by he spamming bbs with lucky fires on me when im in my cruiser i agree with OP:Smile_hiding:

But on a serious note here. if their not camping because their scared for fires. they will camp because their scared for DD torps.

and if not that its because their scared for their own reflection in the water. the only thing that will change the way how they play is them growing some balls and just move forward.

 

Here is the Balance of Nature. More inaccurate BBs > Cruisers can move forward more easily > DDs have to be more careful > BBs can move forward with cruisers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SNUBS]
Players
1,275 posts
6,708 battles
1 minute ago, Kazomir said:

Cruisers can move forward more easily

i can already move forward pretty easy with my cruisers. as long as i know where the bb is the bbs i spot wont hit me or cant hit me.

its the inacurate german bb (usualy) in spawn who gets a random citadel. AGAIN because of the crap dispersion they have already 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[YARRR]
Beta Tester
7,417 posts
13,838 battles
1 minute ago, Kazomir said:

More inaccurate BBs > Cruisers can move forward more easily

 

Lol no.

More inaccuracy translates into more RNG when the target is dodging.

 

So what you're effectively doing is nerfing cruisers two-fold.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,458 posts
2,640 battles
1 minute ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Lol no.

More inaccuracy translates into more RNG when the target is dodging.

 

So what you're effectively doing is nerfing cruisers two-fold.

 

 

I really do not think so. A BB With a very good dispersion is always better at deleting a cruiser outright even if said cruiser is dodging. Or. at least scoring enough penetrations to cause serious damage

 

I really do not see how an increase of BB dispersion nerfs cruisers, sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[YARRR]
Beta Tester
7,417 posts
13,838 battles
Just now, Kazomir said:

A BB With a very good dispersion is always better at deleting a cruiser outright even if said cruiser is dodging.

 

Only at close range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,458 posts
2,640 battles
3 minutes ago, El2aZeR said:

 

Only at close range.

 

At long range a cruiser can see where individual shells are potentially going to fall and act accordingly too as to not get damaged. And as I mentioned before with increased dispersion chances are those shells are not landing near you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Beta Tester
1,196 posts
11,934 battles

"Oh look, fires reducing accuracy, even more reason to stay 20km+ and outrange those pesky cruisers" - BB's probably :cap_look:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[YARRR]
Beta Tester
7,417 posts
13,838 battles
9 minutes ago, Kazomir said:

At long range a cruiser can see where individual shells are potentially going to fall and act accordingly too as to not get damaged.

 

You cannot always dodge everything. Less accuracy will create more situations in which you cannot dodge everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,458 posts
2,640 battles
Just now, El2aZeR said:

 

You cannot always dodge everything. Less accuracy will create more situations in which you cannot dodge everything.

 

With greater gaps between shells caused by lesser dispersion, how can you have MORE trouble dodging? 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HABIT]
Beta Tester
1,568 posts

Warning, awesome paint skills incoming:

Spoiler

59669841925e1_increaseddispersion.png.b5a426881382bd29a703f98f6935ef37.png

 

What you see is what will happen if you increase the dispersion of BBs - be it by fire or any other means like a general nerf. The CA (or any other ship) is coming from the right, get's shot at and either takes evasive actions or not. The green circle shows the impact of the shells with normal dispersion, while the red circle shows increased dispersion. So while the evading ship won't get hit by the normal salvo, the salvo with increased dispersion gives a higher chance of hitting him. For the straight sailing CA it in a way has the opposite effect because the chances that he will get hit by more shells decreases.

Your proposal is - at least in my opinion - not a solution for anything related to correct the balance between BBs and CAs.

And please don't come with up with things like "but now you can dodge every shell because the distance between them is bigger". It might work in some cases but no player has time to keep an eye on every stray shell that is thrown at him or her. Not to mention that some CAs lack the mobility to react to shells when they already maneuvre.

Also, try to think like one of the camping BBs for a second. You think they now decide to get closer because the accuracy is lower? I'd say they will think: "Well, if I get closer they can set fires on my ship and I won't hit anything. Therefore I'll stay at the back." All you punish are BB players (or EVERY player for that matter since it is supposed to be a global change) who actually go to the front because they have to contantly deal with accuracy penalties.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[_FIN_]
Players
87 posts
2,470 battles
17 minutes ago, Kazomir said:

 

That would be too annoying. Even the current Fire effect I always remove with mods.

 

 

I feel soft effects should be explored by WG because they promote skill and open a whole new dimension to differentiating ships, which is badly needed. Then, there should be a thousand ways to redo some aspects of the game, for example, radar with the idea that not everything has to offer a hard, material benefit. Radar could possibly be an always-on combination of "50% spotting aircraft" and quicker detection of ships (animation especially hastened).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,458 posts
2,640 battles
4 minutes ago, Tungstonid said:

Warning, awesome paint skills incoming:

  Hide contents

59669841925e1_increaseddispersion.png.b5a426881382bd29a703f98f6935ef37.png

 

What you see is what will happen if you increase the dispersion of BBs - be it by fire or any other means like a general nerf. The CA (or any other ship) is coming from the right, get's shot at and either takes evasive actions or not. The green circle shows the impact of the shells with normal dispersion, while the red circle shows increased dispersion. So while the evading ship won't get hit by the normal salvo, the salvo with increased dispersion gives a higher chance of hitting him. For the straight sailing CA it in a way has the opposite effect because the chances that he will get hit by more shells decreases.

Your proposal is - at least in my opinion - not a solution for anything related to correct the balance between BBs and CAs.

And please don't come with up with things like "but now you can dodge every shell because the distance between them is bigger". It might work in some cases but no player has time to keep an eye on every stray shell that is thrown at him or her. Not to mention that some CAs lack the mobility to react to shells when they already maneuvre.

Also, try to think like one of the camping BBs for a second. You think they now decide to get closer because the accuracy is lower? I'd say they will think: "Well, if I get closer they can set fires on my ship and I won't hit anything. Therefore I'll stay at the back." All you punish are BB players (or EVERY player for that matter since it is supposed to be a global change) who actually go to the front because they have to contantly deal with accuracy penalties.

 

 

Nice work, but incorrect. Landing site of shells is an Elipse, not a circle. Increasing the DIspersion increaces the width of the elipse, but not the height. (which is the reason the second cruiser in your work is hit)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HABIT]
Beta Tester
1,568 posts
2 minutes ago, Kazomir said:

 

 

Nice work, but incorrect. Landing site of shells is an Elipse, not a circle. Increasing the DIspersion increaces the width of the elipse, but not the height. (which is the reason the second cruiser in your work is hit)

 

This was a concept sketch at best. So it is not 100% accurate.

Also, what makes you think that WG won't also change the height of the ellipse?

The circles themselves might be incorrect but the result would be the same.

And just because my sketch is not 100% correct, doesn't mean all the other points are invalid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
1,458 posts
2,640 battles
Just now, Tungstonid said:

 

This was a concept sketch at best. So it is not 100% accurate.

Also, what makes you think that WG won't also change the height of the ellipse?

The circles themselves might be incorrect but result would be the same.

 

 

DIspersion = Width of the elipse

 

Sigma = Height of the elipse.

 

FIres will reduce Dispersion, not Sigma.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HABIT]
Beta Tester
1,568 posts
2 minutes ago, Kazomir said:

 

 

DIspersion = Width of the elipse

 

Sigma = Height of the elipse.

 

FIres will reduce Dispersion, not Sigma.

 

Again, what makes you think that only the dispersion should/will be changed. A change of the size of the ellipse while keeping the proportions would be more logical.

And the rest of my points are still not invalid.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×