Tier Fire Chances

[RUSSIANBlAS]

Looking at how fire chance works, basically for anyone who doesn't know. Higher tier stuff has buffs for both fire chance when shooting lower tier ships and a reduction to getting crispy when being shot by them. 

 

That's partly why I found NO so painful in T10 games and why something like a Conqueror simply sets things it looks at on fire.

 

Is it about time WG looked at this? CVs are due to get a flat T6 fire chance next patch which will make ambushing them interesting.

 

Maybe if it was normalised across the board then the different tiers in MM might not be as painful?

[DFens_666]

Yes, ive been thinking about that aswell. Never understood why T10 ships need to have the best fire reduction chance, while the Fire % chance usually also rises with the higher tier...

This is very much clear when fighting f.e. with Takao vs T10 ships u get matches where u have like 2-5 fires, and when u get T6 MM u have 10-20.

[RUSSIANBlAS]

1 minute ago, DFens_666 said:

Yes, ive been thinking about that aswell. Never understood why T10 ships need to have the best fire reduction chance, while the Fire % chance usually also rises with the higher tier...

This is very much clear when fighting f.e. with Takao vs T10 ships u get matches where u have like 2-5 fires, and when u get T6 MM u have 10-20.

Yeah, the difference is utterly brutal and that's after factoring in better accuracy/armour/HP/DPM etc, the extra fire chance isn't needed. Like being a T8 BB and even T10 DDs constantly burn you if you don't have FP. 

 

I guess WG implemented the whole fire tier thing to encourage grinding...

[ForlornSailor]

Yes. Also, the same should apply for Torpedodamage imo. Never understood why the lowtier ship has to suffer even more, when fighting higher tier enemys.

 

1 minute ago, Negativvv said:

I guess WG implemented the whole fire tier thing to encourage grinding...

 

I suspect that very much...

[RUSSIANBlAS]

12 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

Yes. Also, the same should apply for Torpedodamage imo. Never understood why the lowtier ship has to suffer even more, when fighting higher tier enemys.

 

 

 

 

Lel wut?! I didn't know torpedoes did more damage vs lower tiers... Oh dear 

[BeauNidl3]

Well the higher the tier generally the more torpedo damage reduction the ships have. It's irrational just as fire chance reduction is. 

[El2aZeR]

1 hour ago, Negativvv said:

Lel wut?! I didn't know torpedoes did more damage vs lower tiers... Oh dear 

 

Some official source on this would be great. I've certainly never heard of it.

[__Helmut_Kohl__]

Of course torpedo damage somewhat scales, as higher tiers have access to stronger torpedoes. 

Torpedo belt protection does not have a coefficient for the tiers though. 

[Runegrem]

I've only heard that torpedo protection is dependent on the ship you use. So it tends to be higher on higher tier ships, just like armour, health and general firepower.

 

Also; yeah, higher tier ships don't need the extra fire chance and protection vs. lower tier ships.

 

Also also, doesn't AA effectiveness work the same? That should probably be looked as as well since now it seems that CVs are on the World of Tanks level of tier dependence. And we don't like that.

[RAHJAILARI]

Well @Negativvv, in my opinion, since being a bottom tier in any battle is already an uphill battle, the fire chance mechanic should in my opinion be exactly the reverse, just to give the little buggers at the least some chance of being able to come out with some results in a higher tier match (I do not mean anything earth-shattering, maybe +0.5-1% per each lower tier  would do).

 

I mean lower tier ships have literally nothing going for them in any match, they typically do not have the range or firepower, nor the mobility or even stealth, when compared to their higher tier cousins. So in the interests of much vaunted game-balance and just to keep things more interesting, it would make sense to me to give lower tier ships on average a slightly increased fire chance so they will have some hope of doing any damage (they cannot possibly hope for pens most of the time).

 

Of course to improve on this, they should also be given slightly better stealth that their higher tier cousins, just because they are typically either slightly or significantly smaller in size (in actual measurements) and also for gameplay purposes, just to give them a little something to get by, when uptiered in a battle.

 

As it is now, whenever uptiered in anything but a DD, you are just cattle for slaughter, pure and simple and this does not a good gameplay make. Evening up the odds even if just a little bit would improve the gameplay experience markedly.

[El2aZeR]

That would make some untweakable (read: premium) ships even more overpowered than they already are. Belfast is an easy example.

[kfa]

I voted for no, cause i play mainly T10, and i like the fire resistance against lower plebs and i dont want my ships to be nerfed.

[__Helmut_Kohl__]

I vote No. 

While I do agree that most T10 don't need the protection as an advantage over T8, I don't want even more HE spam in the high tiers. 

[ollonborre]

5 minutes ago, _Helmut_Kohl_ said:

I vote No. 

While I do agree that most T10 don't need the protection as an advantage over T8, I don't want even more HE spam in the high tiers. 

But if the normalisation is implemented well the fire spam will be the same. Right now tier 10 ships are flamethrowers, and lower tier ships either cause no fires at all or very rarely when fighting against certian tiers.

 

So a normalisation akin to that at tier 6-7 will make the fires about as common as it is now, the biggest difference is that lower tier ships will be able to actually start fires on higher tiers. Basically it will mostly benefit tier 8 cruisers that mostly get shafted in terms of MM and overall usefulness and for everyone else it pretty much stays the same.

[__Helmut_Kohl__]

17 minutes ago, ollonborre said:

But if the normalisation is implemented well the fire spam will be the same. Right now tier 10 ships are flamethrowers, and lower tier ships either cause no fires at all or very rarely when fighting against certian tiers.

 

So a normalisation akin to that at tier 6-7 will make the fires about as common as it is now, the biggest difference is that lower tier ships will be able to actually start fires on higher tiers. Basically it will mostly benefit tier 8 cruisers that mostly get shafted in terms of MM and overall usefulness and for everyone else it pretty much stays the same.

 

He wants to normalize the Fire Protection, like they did on CVs. 

 

That means, high tiers will be more vulnerable to fires, because the normalized coefficient would not be the one you find on T10 now. 

So we would have even more HE spam at T8-10.

 

A Zao or Conqueror could set fires much more easy. Is that what you want? 

[ollonborre]

14 minutes ago, _Helmut_Kohl_ said:

 

He wants to normalize the Fire Protection, like they did on CVs. 

 

That means, high tiers will be more vulnerable to fires, because the normalized coefficient would not be the one you find on T10 now. 

So we would have even more HE spam at T8-10.

 

A Zao or Conqueror could set fires much more easy. Is that what you want? 

In that case I misread, thought the OP meant normalised fire chance.

 

EDIT: Highlighted the part I wanted ro talk about since I did some thinking. If normalised fire protection is the main thing here, something occured to me. Right now a Zao burns tier 8-9 ships more easily than tier 10. If the fire protection is normalised it will have just as high of a chance to burn a tier 8 as a tier 10. See no real problem there. All that does is extend the life of a tier 8 BB for a few salvoes more.

 

On the opposite end of the spectrum tier 8 ships will just as easily burn tier 10 as they will each other. Now this could encourage more HE spam, but in the current state of the game where you have to fling so much HE anyways and not get a single fire HE spam will just remain as it is since it will be more rewarding for tier 8. 

[__Helmut_Kohl__]

@Negativvv

What exactly do you mean? 

Because T10 DDs don't have a higher fire chance than T8 for example. 

 

http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Fire

Do you just want the "Fire Resistance Coefficient" normalized, or also the "Projectile Base Fire Chance" ? 

And what happens to premium ships? 

[RAHJAILARI]

Ahh, thanks for clarification @_Helmut_Kohl_ I had also misunderstood the question... I'm all for that then Hhehehe...

[__Helmut_Kohl__]

33 minutes ago, ollonborre said:

Highlighted the part I wanted ro talk about since I did some thinking. If normalised fire protection is the main thing here, something occured to me. Right now a Zao burns tier 8-9 ships more easily than tier 10. If the fire protection is normalised it will have just as high of a chance to burn a tier 8 as a tier 10. See no real problem there. All that does is extend the life of a tier 8 BB for a few salvoes more.

 

I don't think so.

The normalized Fire Resistance Coefficient would probably not the the one we find on T9 or T10 now, so nothing would change for T8. 

 

On CVs they used the T6 one. 

That would also make T8 burn more often. 

 

Edit:

Om second thought, they could use the T10 coefficient and apply buffs in fire chance where needed on lower tiers. 

Would be a solution for premium ships as well. 

Then they could just remove the coefficient completely and cut all fire chance in half, to make it more transparent (showing the real fire chance in port). 

[ollonborre]

12 minutes ago, _Helmut_Kohl_ said:

Edit:

Om second thought, they could use the T10 coefficient and apply buffs in fire chance where needed on lower tiers. 

Would be a solution for premium ships as well. 

Sort of what I'm going after. Pick a coefficent and then tweak values so some ships don't spin out of control and yet certain ships retain their national flavour (IJN nuclear HE is mainly what I think of) but not to the extreme.

[RUSSIANBlAS]

2 hours ago, _Helmut_Kohl_ said:

@Negativvv

What exactly do you mean? 

Because T10 DDs don't have a higher fire chance than T8 for example. 

 

http://wiki.wargaming.net/en/Ship:Fire

Do you just want the "Fire Resistance Coefficient" normalized, or also the "Projectile Base Fire Chance" ? 

And what happens to premium ships? 

 

I could have sworn I read somewhere that higher tier ships set fire to lower tier ships easier. Might have dreamt it up somewhere however as I can't find it on this forum or anywhere else.

 

Just something that makes tier differences less painful maybe. Although I guess that may mess up the competitive scene if it was played around with too much.

 

[ForlornSailor]

6 minutes ago, Negativvv said:

I could have sworn I read somewhere that higher tier ships set fire to lower tier ships easier.

 

Its not just you, I remember this also.

[RUSSIANBlAS]

4 minutes ago, ForlornSailor said:

 

Its not just you, I remember this also.

 

It might have been on Reddit or the NA forum but I really can't find it again.

 

The chances for T10 shooting T8 were quite eye opening and vice versa, it's far higher and lower than the base stats on the guns. 

[DFens_666]

12 minutes ago, Negativvv said:

 

I could have sworn I read somewhere that higher tier ships set fire to lower tier ships easier.

 

Ofc they do, in the link under FIre chance. If a T8 ship would shoot a T10 ship and both would have the same fire % chance on their shells, the T8 ship would get set more often on fire than the T10 ship, because.

Fire Resistance Coefficient

T8 0.6337

T10 0.5005

 

12 minutes ago, Negativvv said:

And what happens to premium ships? 

 

Premium ships are not invulnerable to game mechanic changes as seen before, so whats the problem?

 

4 hours ago, El2aZeR said:

That would make some untweakable (read: premium) ships even more overpowered than they already are. Belfast is an easy example.

 

Not sure if we are all speaking about the same thing (maybe i misunderstood negativvv?) but why would that be? Currently T7 faces T6/5 more often than T8/9. So the belfast has an easier time starting fires against them. If some change to the Fire Resistance Coefficient would be made, than ofc Belfast would start fires easier against T8/9 ships, but harder against lower tier ships, which he faces MORE often anyway.

[El2aZeR]

4 hours ago, DFens_666 said:

Not sure if we are all speaking about the same thing (maybe i misunderstood negativvv?) but why would that be?

 

I meant that for the suggestion of RAHJAILARI, buffing lower tier ships against higher tier ones. Some ships up-tier a lot better than others, but these could be potentially tweaked if necessary. Not premium ships, though.

 

It'd be much better to simply level the playing field instead of favoring one side over another.