Overmatch mechanic - Good, or no good?

[MrTonMou]

Hello everybody!

As a first post on the Englich forum, I'll quickly present myself (and sorry for my mistakes in advance): I'm a 19 years old Swiss guy (although French speaker) which has been playing Warships since 2015, actually with the start of the OBT. I've been streaming on a French-only community channel, the World_of_warships_FR for aabout 2 years now, and I've casted alongside my colleagues most of the major competitions in World of Warships. I'm a quite decent player with enough knowledge to, i assume, put the balance of the game in question (Don't jump at my throat just now, I'm not here to Q_Q).

So, let's get into the matter: since a good 7-8 months now, in facts since KM BBs, the BBs have had a stupid popularity-power creep over any class in the game. That tends to calm down, but with the new RN BBs coming out soonTM, we're gonna go for another tour *sigh*. With that drastic increase of BBs came a drastic decrease of cruiser players at high tiers (7-8-9-10), and i've tent to more and more ask myself: is is right that BBs should have the right to shoot at a same tier cruiser with AP, and lololpen them pretty much anywhere? Of course, I'm dramatising a bit, it's not that bad, cruisers are cleary not unplayable nor weak for acknowledged folks, but for most of the playerbase, getting punished as hard as that is not fun. they prefer to sail broadside on in a German BB at 20km, so they're that nothing will happen to them and that they will be able to piou-piou all around while their cruisers get wrecked at the front line *re-sigh*. Anyway, i hope I haven't lost you, but to synthesize, here is my question:

Should we delete or change the overmatch mechanic, so that cruisers shouldn't be so underwhelmed in a 1 on 1 engagement?

Please respect my point of view, it's not perfect nor right, but I'd just like to open a debate with you guys, and see what you think ^^ Am i right, am I wrong? Should noobs train themselves better, or should we ease it a bit?

 

PS: Don't trick me into Rock-paper-cissors, this doesn't exist anymore in the game. BBs have more than enough ways to easily defeat DDs (Muh AP pens), and some DDs are better gunboats than cruisers :/

There you go, have fun ^^

[ColonelPete]

Cruisers are cruiser, not gunboats.

[Quetak]

As mainly cruiser player Im saying NO - we need overmatch.

When I think about these three things - cruisers, BBs and overmatch - first what came to my mind is Des Moines vs. Bismarck/Tirpitz. These two BBs are hopeless when DM knows what he is doing, they cant hurt him enough to win this fight in clear 1v1.

Just imagine when all high tier cruisers can do that against all BBs...it will not be fun for BBs and also not for cruisers I think.

On cruisers I like this life on edge, thats what makes them fun for me.

 

[Jethro_Grey]

First things first welcome to the english section!

 

In regards to your suggestion: i consider the OM mechanic to be fine, and i do play mostly CAs and DDs.

Cruisers are support ships, and by definition not meant to go toe to toe with a BB.

Cruiser players should be able to outplay a BB in a cruiser when 1vs1 but not to outgun it, and this is what a lot of people don't get.

In almost every thread about BBs, you'll find posts that indicate or downright state that cruisers should be able to go 1vs1, which is utter nonsense. 

If cruisers were capable of going 1vs1 they'd be BBs.

 

Fix the error that causes massive AP damage to DDs fdrom BBs, yeah. Screw around with a working mechanic: no thanks.

 

On a less serious note: aren't you Swiss guys supposed to be neutral or have a neutral stance on each and every matter? 

[Quetak]

what WG can do about overmatch is inform ALL players that this mechanic is there and how it works. 

[Azakeit]

The Overmatch mechanic is fine.

The problem in BB population is just that BBs now are dumb-proof and too easy to play.

Look at the RN BBs, they have submerged citadel, so other BBs have a hard time dealing big Alpha on them, so you can imagine "let's incinerate them !!", but no, they have a super-heal to compensate that, and good concealment so they can disappear or jump on other cruisers easily.

KM BBs are the same with their turtleback armor, and US BB with lowered citadel, IJN are the only "vanilla" BBs that are somewhat balanced.

 

When playing a cruiser, you can be deleted in one salvo, and you don't have a lot of Tools to deal with other class. You can't delete DDs with your guns, you can burn BBs but it takes a long time.

 

Just give cruisers better Tools to annoy battleships and DDs, like improved HE damage on modules (to deplete AA mounts on BB), a reduce bloom when firing main gun (15sec instead of 20), the ability to destroy torpedoes within a certain radius, depending on your secondary armament (to protect the fleet). These are just first ideas that came to mind, you can come with a lot more in just one brainstorming.

 

Fix CV too... The Bane of BB should be planes. Fixing CV gameplay and population OR adding IA controlled planes from time to time to encourage Cruiser def AA protection.

 

 

[MrTonMou]

1 hour ago, Jethro_Grey said:

First things first welcome to the english section!

 

In regards to your suggestion: i consider the OM mechanic to be fine, and i do play mostly CAs and DDs.

Cruisers are support ships, and by definition not meant to go toe to toe with a BB.

Cruiser players should be able to outplay a BB in a cruiser when 1vs1 but not to outgun it, and this is what a lot of people don't get.

In almost every thread about BBs, you'll find posts that indicate or downright state that cruisers should be able to go 1vs1, which is utter nonsense. 

If cruisers were capable of going 1vs1 they'd be BBs.

 

Fix the error that causes massive AP damage to DDs fdrom BBs, yeah. Screw around with a working mechanic: no thanks.

 

On a less serious note: aren't you Swiss guys supposed to be neutral or have a neutral stance on each and every matter? 

Well thanks ^^ In facts, I'm not an incompetent player, I've often 1v1 Yamatos or Montanas with my Hindenburg or Msokva, simply by angling effectively. In my honest opinion, cruisers are fine for people who really know their thing, but to new players, it may seem mysterious or unknown. What Quetak suggested is a really good idea, because it would allow new players to better understand the why and the how.

On the neutral stance, I'm neutral on this question. my post may not mean it tho, since English is not my language, i haven't been able to be more neutral. I've had several talks with my community, and quite some people thought that there was a problem. That's why I'm here with a pole, I'm just trying to take temperature, and see what people think of the topic. For now, the majority seems to be ok with the current state of this mechanic, and that's for the better :)

[MrTonMou]

Also, wanna say thanks to you guys. Comprehensive feedback is great, it's good to see that people on forums still want to think and discuss, even about the most basic of features. Keep it that way ^^

(Because it's not the same on every forum, I can tell...)

[Dlia_Katyushi]

Crossing the T. This should be doable in the game. For example instead of 14.3 how about we use something like 8 for overmatch mechanics. This way a BB can not overmatch the belt armour of other ships but can overmatch all of the bows and decks. Again a heavy cruiser would be able to overmatch 25 mm armour and all parts of the DDs. This will stop the bow in meta and make people learn how to angle. Also we must raise the citadels of the BBs above the waterline to make giving full broadside whle 8 km away from an enemy a death sentence. 

[VC381]

Well, I don't think it's a problem that BBs can lol-pen cruisers (cruiser mains here) but it is a bit dumb that BBs can go bow-in and be practically immune to each-other.

 

Let me explain. I understand that the game needs some simplification and in that sense I think overmatch and auto-bounce mechanics are fine in principle. But a lot of a ship is NOT armour, and even where it is, there are different types of armour that behave differently. A cruiser is not designed to withstand BB shells and so here the overmatch is at least realistic. Cruisers have other tricks, this isn't a problem. A BB is designed to take the shells of another BB but usually only at certain ranges, and this armour makes a box around important stuff (the citadel). The bow, stern, most of the superstructure, this is pretty thin, low-grade steel that is good enough to keep water out and split a wave so the ship can move, but it should basically be "invisible" to shells.

 

So yeah, BBs can lol-pen cruisers, that overmatch is OK, but also BBs should be able to damage each-other better. Then they will shoot at cruisers less and won't bow camp.

[lycea]

Overmatch should stay the same. but perhaps citadel damage on cruisers should be lowered untill the battleship overpopulation is gone (if that ever happens) because it's not fair that 1 'paper' has to deal with 7 'scissors' every match. 

[Carnivore81]

1 hour ago, Quetak said:

As mainly cruiser player Im saying NO - we need overmatch.

When I think about these three things - cruisers, BBs and overmatch - first what came to my mind is Des Moines vs. Bismarck/Tirpitz. These two BBs are hopeless when DM knows what he is doing, they cant hurt him enough to win this fight in clear 1v1.

Just imagine when all high tier cruisers can do that against all BBs...it will not be fun for BBs and also not for cruisers I think.

On cruisers I like this life on edge, thats what makes them fun for me.

 

They could that for 1 Patch Back in CBT and it was absolut BS. I had a few 1vs 1 Back then. And CA could easily  kill you with HE and its DPM .Just angled rushed you down.  

[puxflacet]

my old brain is probably tired but i have to admit that i didnt get the nuances between all those poll choices...it's like excercise in logic

[aboomination]

17 minutes ago, Dlia_Katyushi said:

Crossing the T. This should be doable in the game. For example instead of 14.3 how about we use something like 8 for overmatch mechanics. This way a BB can not overmatch the belt armour of other ships but can overmatch all of the bows and decks. Again a heavy cruiser would be able to overmatch 25 mm armour and all parts of the DDs. This will stop the bow in meta and make people learn how to angle. Also we must* raise the citadels of the BBs above the waterline to make giving full broadside whle 8 km away from an enemy a death sentence. 

• Since when is overmatching belt armor of any concern? Did I miss something? Can you elaborate? Also there is VERY little belt armor in the game that can be overmatched.
• Crossing the T would make sense if the horizontal dispersion was far better than the vertical dispersion which is not the case (it's actually quite the opposite). When it comes to flat broadsides overmatch mechanics do not come into play unless you hit the deck armor or heavily angled citadel plating.
• Why should 203mm shells be able to overmatch any cruiser's bow armor? 
• * I'm not convinced
• pls elaborate

 

Overmatch mechanic: Penetrating an armor plating regardless of it's angling due to the caliber of the shell exceeding the raw thickness of the plating my a certain factor (no auto bounce).

Normalization angle: Factoring in the ability of the shell to point it's tip near an ideal 90° impact angle due to it's shape. Reducing the possibility of auto bounces. USN shells excel in this regard while GER AP sucks.

[creamgravy]

It's essential for MMO tier/calibre progression.

 

Beat up the lower tier guy, get beaten up by the higher tier guy.

[aboomination]

1 minute ago, creamgravy said:

It's essential for MMO tier/calibre progression.

Beat up the lower tier guy, get beaten up by the higher tier guy.

I think this provides diversity regarding gameplay and keeps us on our toes, forcing us to pick our fights accordingly and plan ahead. 

It's much easier to hurt higher tier guys in WoWS than it is in WoT - WAY easier.

[mikelight1805]

I voted option 3. i don't consider the current way this is implemented to be fine.

 

I have no problem with being deleted if i show too much broadside, or i get lolpened from an unexpected angle by someone who has worked themselves into an advantageous position. No problems, i will take that on the chin

 

What frustrates me is when i have turned away and am disengaging and have stopped firing. Then a salvo comes in, overmatches the stern, which can have some bizarre angles considering i am angled away from them, and still causes 5k+ damage per hit.

[aboomination]

4 minutes ago, mikelight1805 said:

I voted option 3. i don't consider the current way this is implemented to be fine.

 

I have no problem with being deleted if i show too much broadside, or i get lolpened from an unexpected angle by someone who has worked themselves into an advantageous position. No problems, i will take that on the chin

 

What frustrates me is when i have turned away and am disengaging and have stopped firing. Then a salvo comes in, overmatches the stern, which can have some bizarre angles considering i am angled away from them, and still causes 5k+ damage per hit.

So you don't like it up the bum but everything else is fine? What does that have to do with overmatch mechanics? Don't give your butt so easily ffs 

[mikelight1805]

Just now, aboomination said:

So you don't like it up the bum but everything else is fine?

 

Not particularly no

 

Some do though...

[aboomination]

2 minutes ago, mikelight1805 said:

 

Not particularly no

 

Some do though...

So what's your point then?

[VC381]

13 minutes ago, aboomination said:

• Crossing the T would make sense if the horizontal dispersion was far better than the vertical dispersion which is not the case (it's actually quite the opposite).

 

You misunderstand in-game dispersion. This was discussed at length in another thread and confirmed by a mod. The horizontal and vertical dispersion in game are calculated in an imaginary vertical plane through the target, and in this sense the horizontal is more than the vertical. But the actual pattern on the sea is, correctly as proven by screenshots of firing tests, longer than it is wide.

 

But, the other guy misunderstands crossing the T. This is a squadron concentration of fire tactic, not a 1v1 angling tactic.

 

Actually another issue is that the guns in game are too accurate, so it makes it viable to trade away 1/3 or even 1/2 of your firepower for the horrendously unrealistic survivability you get from being bow-in.

 

Anyway, I don't see why your reaction is so negative. Actually, all ships should be able to bow overmatch their own class and smaller.

[mikelight1805]

3 minutes ago, aboomination said:

So what's your point then?

 

According to the poll, most are fine with overmatch, Whilst i am not.

[Darth_Glorious]

Overmatch rule can save you sometimes and kill you other times, so I think it is OK for now.

[aboomination]

4 minutes ago, VC381 said:

You misunderstand in-game dispersion. This was discussed at length in another thread and confirmed by a mod. The horizontal and vertical dispersion in game are calculated in an imaginary vertical plane through the target, and in this sense the horizontal is more than the vertical. But the actual pattern on the sea is, correctly as proven by screenshots of firing tests, longer than it is wide.

So it feels like "a" but actually it is "b"? Interesting. Probably bc of the height of the targets, not allowing the shells to fly as far as they could quite often (but resulting in those damn superstructure overpens).

[Darth_Glorious]

Datamined data show that in game, vertical dispersion is about 3 ttmes of horizontal dispersion. So it is based on real life.