Jump to content

28 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

[SCRUB]
Beta Tester
176 posts
13,783 battles

If it AINT broken don’t  “Fix it”.  Division chat window!


If you have the time to “Fix” unbroken things maybe FIX THIS.
 


Or better said maybe look in these issues and instead and try to fix some.
due to the excessive amount of points I resided for a bullet point layout. I might elaborate some point in the future depending on feedback, time and willingness.

 

 

Disclaimer.

Spoiler

These are the things I think are:  Acknowledged broken, Broken in my opinion, and things that aren’t “broken” but that I would like to see a change in.

I try to refrain from “balancing” opinions (x does to much dmg, Y is to OP), but I do make suggestions on parameters that can be used for balancing (example; bloom).

I also acknowledge that some proposed fixes are impossible to achieve do to coding, #players, or other things. (exp, MM stealth balance)

 

@MrConway, or other WG-staff

Spoiler

 

Can you or anyone else from WG-staff. Atleast for “Acknowledged broken things” and hopfully also for “Broken things” confirm wargamings “official” statement on these things;

If there broken, If they have been consider as, “needing revision”. Or if it’s working as intended

 

Legend: Green; Balancing opinions, Blue; Broken since CBT.

 

Fix THIS:

Acknowledged broken things:

Spoiler

1.    Battleship AP penetrations on DDs, not to mention 1 shell double penn dmg, overp + penn dmg on CLs and DDs.


2.    Bloom

a.    Bloom duration the same for all ship types (/gun calibres)? (BBs can blinkshoot!?)

b.    No secondary bloom!

c.    0 sec AA bloom
 

3.    Saipan free strafe out!
 

4.    All premium ships that are removed from shop!

a.    Exclusion and unbalanced

i.     “new” players have no excess to “unbalanced” ships, therefore don’t have excess to compete on equal footing

ii.     “Unbalanced” ships still in the game!

b.    Terms of Service 8.3.g “we do not make any promises about how or when Virtual Goods may be available and can update or change Virtual Goods at any time.”
 

5.    Chat server!

 

Broken things:

Spoiler

0.Moduals FULLY absorbing HE damage.

a. Makeing BB AP vs DD the superior choise.

b. pray to RNG you dont hit any moduals with high dmg he shells.
 

1.    (No) Match Making Ranking (mmr)!

a.    Askewer mmr formula better than NO mmr

b.    No incentive to improve, aka "death grind your way to tier X"
 

2.    MM (better a 30-60 sec wait than 7-15 min boring game!)

a.    Radar/Hydro/(DF)AA Dived equally!

b.    Skill (mmr) dived equally, combined Skill of all ship = ± skill of all enemy ships. If possible:

i.     Combined skill of all allied DDs = ±Skill of Enemy DDs

ii.    Combined skill of all allied BBs = ±Skill of Enemy BBS

iii.   Etc.

c.    Stealth divided equally. (karbarof ≠ Z-53, Shimi =± yugimo )
 

3.    Line-riding

a.    see KotS season 2 final and with that winner, line-riding FTW!

i.   (fix?) WoWp Hit border AI controll incoming angel = outgoing angle (min of 30° outgoing)

b.    STILL Can't drop torpedoes from Torpedo bombers close to the map edge!
 

4.    DFAA fully scatter ALL!

a.    Full scater 7,2 km away, long range AA (Dual Pourpuse guns) can scatter (fully) too?

b.    0 AA value still full scatter

c.    Cv has 0 time to react to DFAA activation, (and 0 activation visibility)

i.    “patched-out” no scatter if DFAA activated later than drop order given!
 

5.    DFAA on CVs

a.    With introduction of “strafe” (/strafe out) 2 min CV DFAA became excessive!
 

6.    Invisible AA platforms

a.    Smoked ships can shoot planes (8,2 km away)?

 i.     Reduce planes render range for smoked ships?

b.    AA bloom 0 sec

c.    Large surface ships have lower air detection than AA range

i.     Meaning get shot first, than see,

ii.    0 reaction time.
 

7.    Radar & hydro

a.     full AOW vision instead of:

i.     Removes smoke effect, removes line of sight requirement

ii.     ships(/torps) & Torps(/ships) get +X or +X% acquisition range

1.    X can be ship type dependent

2.    +X/X% can be buffed with “Target Acquisition System Modification 1”
 

8.    Rendering small objected

a.     active,

i.     bigger CV UI lag ( i clicked on that plane why don’t i have it selected jet)

ii.     planes position ≠ icon planes

iii.     Huge plane “input” lag (i said Strafe out! What is taking so long!)

b.    Inactive,

i.     Can’t see AA, let alone DFAA

ii.    Can’t see/hear strafes,

iii.   Less plane “input” lag

 

My personal vendeta’s....Eerh, things that I want to see changed or be under review

Spoiler

 

1.     Smoke ship render range (think cycloon here)

a.     When in smoke “render range” of ships/planes/torps drastically reduce,

                                                    i.     Dependent on smoked ship-type, nation and ??, But keep it shipeline consistent!

                                                  ii.     “Target Acquisition System Modification 1“ reduces smoke “render range” penalty.

b.     Balance combination between current “smoke mechanic” and proposed!
 

2.     No drawbacks for using Repiar/DCP/DFAA

a.     All your guys are repairing/shooting AA guns, and your still able to; control ship, reload guns/shoot guns, use secondary’s, use consumables, (for repair) have AA. Aren’t your guys busy

                                               i.     for DFAA,  overheated AA guns, short time 0 AA dps
 

3.     Magical Dual Purpose guns

a.     You can use them for AA while shooting a surface ship with secondary’s.
 

4.     no skill, Magical Damage Control Party (proposed change, hopfully, increase skill cap astronomically)

a.     Instant! (patched to instant)
No need to ¼-½(nation depended) active duration before damage is controlled

b.     Immune!
No, each new fire/flood while active needs to

                                                    i.     “pass a.”:at least some time flood/fire, or

                                                  ii.     “pass c”: atleast some time flood/fire,

1.     + if cumulative flood/fire takes longer to repair than repair is active flood/fire stick (reduced duration for active repair seconds)

c.      All!
no, needs X seconds before each fire stop, need
2X seconds before each flood to stop (individual, 1st fire stops at tx, 2th=t2x(first flood stoped), 3th=t3x, etc.. (x nation depended?).
 

5.     Fixed Damge vs % DMG (%= percentage of receiving ship hp)

a.     I would swap flood and fire dmg  to predominate Xdps with a little X%dps

b.     I would swap shell dmg to  X%dmg + Xdmg

                                                    i.     (Overpenn/pen/citadel to a/b/c*X% dmg), not sure

c.      I would swap torp dmg to Xdmg +X%dmg

 

 

With this list i tryed to give you all some food for tought
I hope WG allready knew these issues, and reimbursed there comunication efforts on these. OR if RNGesus allows it "FIX IT"!

 

yours sincerely,

TomBombardil

 

Reminded vendeta’s (things that slipped my mind at original post time)

Spoiler

Forgot another TWO (or actaly 1, and made the other one it own point)

1.      Invis AA from Smoke. When Planes are spotted (which they almost always are with 8km away btw.). and “something“ in smoke can freely (full range) shoot them.

a.      You can’t see the source due to 1. UI inconsistency 2. AA tracers requires animate small objects to be ON.

b.      Zero Smoke AA bloom.

c.      Full effectiveness of AA guns while in smoke?

                                          i.     I don’t get that when in smoke you can still shoot, let alone “render” planes as far as 8,2 km away! (fix) reduce render ranges of planes while IN smoke (think light cyclone here).
 

2.      Consumables Key consistency option

a.      Hydro is Y instead if U because I have 3 consumables instead of 4?
Bismark:      Y= Plane              U= Hydro
Edinbrough: Y=Hydro             U=Smoke
DD:               Y=Speedboost    T=Smoke
Charles:       T= DFAA/hydro  Y=Plane U=Speedboost

b. Give us an OPTION to key-bind consumables instead of consumable SLOTS

 

  • Cool 8
  • Boring 2
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Beta Tester
176 posts
13,783 battles

Not 1 hour later and allready rememberd an other one

 

Ededit it in under "broken things" as.

0.    Moduals FULLY absorbing HE damage.

a. Makeing BB AP vs DD the superior choise.

b. pray to RNG you dont hit any moduals with high dmg he shells.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
5,390 posts
6,781 battles
1 hour ago, TomBombardil said:

1.    Battleship AP penetrations on DDs, not to mention 1 shell double penn dmg, overp + penn dmg.

Technically there is nothing wrong when a shell does Overpen + Pen damage, i means its possible. Overpen a part, enter another one and detonate.

Double penetration or CItadel + Penetration are ofc totaly broken.

 

13 minutes ago, TomBombardil said:

0.    Moduals FULLY absorbing HE damage.

Yes, this is pretty questionable.

13 minutes ago, TomBombardil said:

a. Makeing BB AP vs DD the superior choise.

Once BB AP on DDs is "fixed", HE seems to become the must use choice against them (depends how it gets fixed) but u cant have 0 damage pens destroying all modules then. Ive had to shoot a DD in my MIssouri once while HE loaded, and i dd 3600 damage with 6 HE hits... so thats 2 damage worth of pens. He had like 7k health total, so he should have been dead. With Overpens ALWAYS dealing damage, u cant fix BB AP and leave HE as it is.

 

Mostly i agree with what u said, something i dont, but i wont comment on those too much.

Share this post


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

You should change the red colour because it is the moderator colour and will be edited by them for breaking the rules. You also should stay with one font size just for the sake of better reading

 

2 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

If it AINT broken don’t  “Fix it”.  Division chat window!


If you have the time to “Fix” unbroken things maybe FIX THIS.

 

I agree.

 

2 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

2.    Bloom

a.    Bloom duration the same for all ship types (/gun calibres)? (BBs can blinkshoot!?)

b.    No secondary bloom!

c.    0 sec AA bloom

a. As far as I know WG's statement in this matter is that they don't want ships to appear and disappear too quickly and they feel like 20 seconds is the right duration.

b. IMO not needed. I am not aware of any ship with a larger secondary range than spotting range. So why do you even need a secondary bloom?

c. Again, not needed. Ships get spotted by planes as soon as the planes are in the ship's AA range, or rather as soon as the AA guns open fire. The AA range becomes the air detectability. If the planes leave the AA range they also leave the maximum detectability range and therefore any bloom is useless anyway. The only situation I can think of where this is useful is when a stealthy DD or CL gets spotted by planes and activates his AA only as long as the planes are in his detectability range and then deactivates them and stealths up although the planes could still spot it with activated AA. But you can ask people on this forum how much more nerfs DDs and CLs need. :Smile_smile:

 

2 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

3.    Saipan free strafe out!

Is a thing, I agree.

 

2 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

4.    All premium ships that are removed from shop!

a.    Exclusion and unbalanced

i.     “new” players have no excess to “unbalanced” ships, therefore don’t have excess to compete on equal footing

ii.     “Unbalanced” ships still in the game!

b.    Terms of Service 8.3.g “we do not make any promises about how or when Virtual Goods may be available and can update or change Virtual Goods at any time.”

Well, as the terms of service state as quoted by you, WG has all rights to remove ships from the premium shop and doesn't have to bring them back. So what exactely do you want to say with that? They could do it (and my guess is they will at some point, if only for a short time to make some money out of it) but they currently don't because a lot of the removed ships were ... maybe too strong in the right player's hand. Also, new players need unbalanced/strong premium ships to compete on equal footing with more experienced players? Sorry, but that's pathetic and just not true. How about learning how to play first. A good player in a silver ships will still stomp a newby in a Belfast.

 

2 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

1.    (No) Match Making Ranking (mmr)!

a.    Askewer mmr formula better than NO mmr

b.    No incentive to improve, aka "death grind your way to tier X"

Define "Match Making Ranking". It sounds like a new word for skill-based MM and before we have this discussion again, please look at one of the bazillion threads about it that we already have.

 

2 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

2.    MM (better a 30-60 sec wait than 7-15 min boring game!)

a.    Radar/Hydro/(DF)AA Dived equally!

b.    Skill (mmr) dived equally, combined Skill of all ship = ± skill of all enemy ships. If possible:

i.     Combined skill of all allied DDs = ±Skill of Enemy DDs

ii.    Combined skill of all allied BBs = ±Skill of Enemy BBS

iii.   Etc.

c.    Stealth divided equally. (karbarof ≠ Z-53, Shimi =± yugimo )

IMO DefAA ships don't have to be equal, especially in games where there is no CV anyway. Same goes for Hydro.

a. A little bit better distribution of radar would be nice. Doesn't have to be 1:1 but at least something to prevent 5 radar ships vs. 0, in other words: to prevent the extreme cases. You shouldn't be able to tell exactely which ship in the enemy team will use which consumable.

b. See the point before.

c. You might have a point there. However, I relish the challenge of having different team compositions with their advantages and disadvantages.

 

2 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

3.    Line-riding

a.    see KotS season 2 final and with that winner, line-riding FTW!

i.   (fix?) WoWp Hit border AI controll incoming angel = outgoing angle (min of 30° outgoing)

b.    STILL Can't drop torpedoes from Torpedo bombers close to the map edge!

a. Yes it is annoying although it has changed a lot since WG decided to cut the engine power of ships which use this ... feature.

b. Yes you can. But it is a little bit tricky.

 

2 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

4.    DFAA fully scatter ALL!

a.    Full scater 7,2 km away

b.    0 AA value still full scatter

c.    Cv has 0 time to react to DFAA activation, (and 0 activation visibility)

i.    “patched-out” no scatter if DFAA activated later than drop order given!

Can you make this a bit easier to understand?

a. Yes, DefAA also influences planes which are 7,2 km away. Which is actually an advantage because in  this case the CV captain can still retreat his planes before they enter all AA zones. And as a CV you want to drop as close to the ship as possible anyway, so changing this will probably have zero impact on how CVs play (besides that you lose the advantage of knowing when DefAA is activated earlier).

b. The panic effect is given by all AA guns so how do you know it came from the disabled AA guns?

c. What makes DefAA visible is the increased spread of the drop zones. Yes, CVs have zero time to react but is an earlier warning really necessary?

c.i. is this already patched out or do you want it to be patched out?  As far as I know the panic will have an effect as long as the planes haven't dropped their load which IMO is fine.

 

2 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

5.    DFAA on CVs

a.    With introduction of “strafe” (/strafe out) 2 min CV DFAA became excessive!

What do you mean by excessive? The DefAA on CVs was introduced after the strafing ability of fighters and should prevent CV sniping early in the game (on tier 8 and up). What is your case?

 

2 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

6.    Invisible AA platforms

a.    Smoked ships can shoot planes (8,2 km away)?

 i.     Reduce planes render range for smoked ships?

b.    AA bloom 0 sec

c.    Large surface ships have lower air detection than AA range

i.     Meaning get shot first, than see,

ii.    0 reaction time.

a. Planes can't spot ships in smoke at all and especially the RN CLs of higher tiers have quite a nasty AA, especially if you don't expect them. They need someone to spot the planes though, else they can't shoot them from smoke.

b. See point 2.

c. No, they don't. Maybe with the exception of said RN CLs, I am not sure about them.

 

2 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

7.    Radar & hydro

a.     full AOW vision instead of:

i.     Removes smoke effect, removes line of sight requirement

ii.     ships(/torps) & Torps(/ships) get +X or +X% acquisition range

1.    X can be ship type dependent

2.    +X/X% can be buffed with “Target Acquisition System Modification 1”

Please elaborate (in a better understandable manner).

 

2 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

2.     No drawbacks for using Repiar/DCP/DFAA

a.     All your guys are repairing/shooting AA guns, and your still able to; control ship, reload guns/shoot guns, use secondary’s, use consumables, (for repair) have AA. Aren’t your guys busy

                                               i.     for DFAA,  overheated AA guns, short time 0 AA dps
 

3.     Magical Dual Purpose guns

a.     You can use them for AA while shooting a surface ship with secondary’s.
 

4.     no skill, Magical Damage Control Party (proposed change, hopfully, increase skill cap astronomically)

a.     Instant! (patched to instant)
No need to ¼-½(nation depended) active duration before damage is controlled

b.     Immune!
No, each new fire/flood while active needs to

                                                    i.     “pass a.”:at least some time flood/fire, or

                                                  ii.     “pass c”: atleast some time flood/fire,

1.     + if cumulative flood/fire takes longer to repair than repair is active flood/fire stick (reduced duration for active repair seconds)

c.      All!
no, needs X seconds before each fire stop, need
2X seconds before each flood to stop (individual, 1st fire stops at tx, 2th=t2x(first flood stoped), 3th=t3x, etc.. (x nation depended?).

WoWS is not a simulator, so I'd say those things are fine as they are.

2. You know that a  ships don't have just 10 guys for the whole ship but dozens to hundreds and everyone of them has his own duty? You have fixed teams for main batteries, secondary batteries, the bridge, engine room, AA guns and damage control. It is not like you have ten guys who are running around, first shooting one main gun, then shooting down a plane and after this turning the steering wheel...

3. As said above, this is not a simulation game.

4. The current DCP and repair party already has a certain skill cap. Those who don't use it appropriatly will die sooner of fire and flooding. And you still see a lot of players not using it the right way (i.e. extinguishing the first fire).

 

2 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

5.     Fixed Damge vs % DMG (%= percentage of receiving ship hp)

a.     I would swap flood and fire dmg  to predominate Xdps with a little X%dps

b.     I would swap shell dmg to  X%dmg + Xdmg

                                                    i.     (Overpenn/pen/citadel to a/b/c*X% dmg), not sure

c.      I would swap torp dmg to Xdmg +X%dmg

As far as I understand it... Not a big fan of it. But to fully evaluate this exact (or even vague) numbers are needed. Swapping shell damage to a certain percent of ship HP lost is not only counterintuitive because on one hand it goes against the mindset/expectation bigger gun -> bigger shell -> bigger hole -> more explody stuff -> more damage, on the other hand it also makes tanking BBs kind of obsolet. What advantage does a ship with a higher HP pool have compared to a ship with lower HP pool if the damage taken is in percent? If a shell does 10% damage, the BB with 100k HP will lose 10k HP while the DD with 10k HP will lose 1k. Both will die after 10 hits... Now, the DD has the advantage of mobility and stealth. Yeah, I know, BBs have armour but this is a double-edged sword since it makes it easier to bounce shots but also to get full penetrations instead of overpens. But again, without a more or less rough estimation of what the proportions of %damage nd absolute damage will be, it is hard to judge.

 

1 hour ago, TomBombardil said:

Not 1 hour later and allready rememberd an other on

 

Ededit it in under "broken things" as.

0.    Moduals FULLY absorbing HE damage.

a. Makeing BB AP vs DD the superior choise.

b. pray to RNG you dont hit any moduals with high dmg he shells.

I think it is the other way around. AP shells can be fully absorbed by external modules like AA guns while HE does splash damage and can damage several modules while also doing damage.

What makes AP the preferred choice of BBs against DDs is rather the high reload time coupled with normal penetration damage if the DD is angled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[FATAL]
Beta Tester
571 posts
2,595 battles

Don't have enough recent game knowledge to comment on most of this, but isn't the fact that large calibre BB AP shells are inefficient/ineffective against DDs (and other lightly armoured targets) at least based in real life?  There are many examples from WW2 of lightly armoured ships surviving large calibre AP rounds, when an HE round would have been significantly more devastating, precisely because the AP round passed straight through.  Yes it would have caused damage, sometimes flooding, but that's nothing compared to what a 14"+ HE shell would do to a thinly armoured DD...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-5D-]
Players
4 posts
3,296 battles

Isn't the game just become a bit of a mess after each update overwrites some of the mechanics in one way or another?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HABIT]
Beta Tester
1,568 posts
1 hour ago, krazypenguin said:

Don't have enough recent game knowledge to comment on most of this, but isn't the fact that large calibre BB AP shells are inefficient/ineffective against DDs (and other lightly armoured targets) at least based in real life?  There are many examples from WW2 of lightly armoured ships surviving large calibre AP rounds, when an HE round would have been significantly more devastating, precisely because the AP round passed straight through.  Yes it would have caused damage, sometimes flooding, but that's nothing compared to what a 14"+ HE shell would do to a thinly armoured DD...

It is but as I wrote above the - let's call it - problem of BB AP shells causing too much damage to DDs has been brought up for a while now at several occasions. Normally a BB would do overpen damage against DDs but if the DD is slightly angled, e.g. because he wants to evade shots, he can get full penetration damage and this can be a lot considering the low HP pool. This and the long reload time makes BB AP "good enough" against DDs, although HE might still do more (consistent) damage

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AAO]
Players
2,142 posts
10,657 battles
1 hour ago, Tungstonid said:

a. As far as I know WG's statement in this matter is that they don't want ships to appear and disappear too quickly and they feel like 20 seconds is the right duration.

Of course it is the "right" duration for WG, because with 20 secs only the "right" shipclass can blink in and out...

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Beta Tester
176 posts
13,783 battles
25 minutes ago, Tungstonid said:

It is but as I wrote above the - let's call it - problem of BB AP shells causing too much damage to DDs has been brought up for a while now at several occasions. Normally a BB would do overpen damage against DDs but if the DD is slightly angled, e.g. because he wants to evade shots, he can get full penetration damage and this can be a lot considering the low HP pool. This and the long reload time makes BB AP "good enough" against DDs, although HE might still do more (consistent) damage

 

@Tungstonid Thx the great feedback and especially for colour mistake!

 

And thats why it is an "Acknowledged broken". it is known that issue excist, not only that, WG acknowledged this (BB pens on DD) needs fixing, and along side it the dubble dmg from 1 shell. maby @MrConway WG can give us a priorty indication? can give us a ETA? or what preposed fixes are? or difficulties that are encounterd for fixing this?

 

Not only makes BB AP this a "good enough" options. Since HE pen (yes HE) can get absorbed by "incapacitating a modual". Especially the engine, rendering your BB HE shell with 0 dmg! IT makes AP the  superior? more the "consistent" option. Atleast you do overpen with a chance of more instead of the other way around.

  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HABIT]
Beta Tester
1,568 posts
1 minute ago, TomBombardil said:

 

And thats why it is an "Acknowledged broken". it is known that issue excist, not only that, WG acknowledged this (BB pens on DD) needs fixing, and along side it the dubble dmg from 1 shell.

 

Not only makes BB AP this a "good enough" options. Since HE pen (yes HE) can get absorbed by "incapacitating a modual". Especially the engine, rendering your BB HE shell with 0 dmg! IT makes AP the  superior? more the "consistent" option. Atleast you do overpen with a chance of more instead of the other way around.

Read my first answer to your post. I'd say AP shells are more prone to do no damage because they get "absorbed" by modules than HE shells are. At least it is more noticeable if you hit an enemy ship for 3 penetrations but you don't do a single point of damage because instead of the hull you penetrated a main battery, an AA gun and a torpedoe launcher. So, I rather see it as a problem for AP shells. And I'd also say it is not a specific problem of BB AP vs DDs. Those are two different issues because IMO HE/AP getting stuck in modules doesn't have anything to do with why BB players usually use ammunition type X against a certain ship class.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
4,945 posts
7,181 battles
4 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

1.    Battleship AP penetrations on DDs

By your own idea this should have been red, as it hasn't changed. Not broken, just you finally noticed. Working exactly as intended

 

4 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

not to mention 1 shell double penn dmg, overp + penn dmg on CLs and DDs

Newsflash - that bug isn't class related. Any ship firing at any ship can have it happen

 

4 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

3.    Saipan free strafe out!

Premium ship, can't nerf (some laws protecting it bcuz people paid money? something like that from what I've heard). There are many premiums who need some good nerfing

 

4 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

4.    All premium ships that are removed from shop!

a.    Exclusion and unbalanced

i.     “new” players have no excess to “unbalanced” ships, therefore don’t have excess to compete on equal footing

ii.     “Unbalanced” ships still in the game!

b.    Terms of Service 8.3.g “we do not make any promises about how or when Virtual Goods may be available and can update or change Virtual Goods at any time.”

1st of all - "buy it while you can" is a marketing strategy, I bet people buy them more if they have to decide quickly rather than thinking about it.

Ship is in shop for 3 days - buy or no? Well, I want it so lets go!

Ship is in shop permanently - buy or no? Well, I don't really need it right now, kinda want it but I can wait...

See my point?

 

You missed it? Your fault. Same as events - they are time limited for a reason. You played at that moment - you had the chance, you didn't play - tough luck, nothing but you yourself to blame.

Also unbalanced ships shouldn't be available, that's already kinda emphasized in the part where they are called "unbalanced". Or did you miss your precious chance to get the Payfast or Kutuzov and now are crying over WG taking your chance away?

 

Can't think of a silver ship that's seriously unbalanced... there are weaker and stronger ships, especially on a situational basis, but as far as premiums go... Well, already discussed in your 3rd point

 

4 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

0.Moduals FULLY absorbing HE damage.

You mean HE doesn't overpen modules to hit the ship behind them? Lol, this is new

 

4 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

a. Makeing BB AP vs DD the superior choise.

b. pray to RNG you dont hit any moduals with high dmg he shells.

a. it's not the superior choice, it's the convenient "good enough" chouce as that's what you usually already have loaded and will not wait 30s reload just to maybe get a shot over at a DD with the "correct amo". Pretty sure even a DD or Cruiser would take their 1st shot with AP if that's what they had loaded

 

b. all aiming, especially with BBs, is praying to RNG. You can help it a good deal by learning to aim, but eventually RNG rules all

 

4 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

1.    (No) Match Making Ranking (mmr)!

Skill based MM is not a thing, and it's long since confirmed it's not going to be a thing

 

4 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

2.    MM

b.    Skill (mmr) dived equally

Check previous point

 

4 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

c.    Stealth divided equally. (karbarof ≠ Z-53, Shimi =± yugimo )

So a Khaba always has to meet a Khaba? Go play Co-Op, would be your dream MM

 

4 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

4.    DFAA fully scatter ALL!

Scatter works at some ranges, not all of your AA guns.

 

4 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

c.    Cv has 0 time to react to DFAA activation, (and 0 activation visibility)

Actually there is visual identification of far more tracers going up in the air

 

4 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

5.    DFAA on CVs

What, problems CV sniping?

 

4 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

6.    Invisible AA platforms

Ships in smoke can't spot those aircraft for themselves, there are other ships spotting them

 

4 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

c.    Large surface ships have lower air detection than AA range

Name some

 

4 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

i.     Can’t see AA, let alone DFAA

Yes you can, also situational awareness of what's where

 

4 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

a.     When in smoke “render range” of ships/planes/torps drastically reduce,

                                                    i.     Dependent on smoked ship-type, nation and ??, But keep it shipeline consistent!

Allied DD smokes you up and you suddenly can't fire. Great troll

 

4 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

a.     All your guys are repairing/shooting AA guns, and your still able to; control ship, reload guns/shoot guns, use secondary’s, use consumables, (for repair) have AA. Aren’t your guys busy

Oh, I didn't know that the crew of starboard 3rd AA gun is responsible for damage control in the boiler room 1.

Drawback is - they are on cooldown, and thus can't be used. Plus you have one less charge left (if applicable)

 

4 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

4.     no skill, Magical Damage Control Party (proposed change, hopfully, increase skill cap astronomically)

a.     Instant! (patched to instant)

Just reminding this is a GAME not a simulator

 

4 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

5.     Fixed Damge vs % DMG (%= percentage of receiving ship hp)

a.     I would swap flood and fire dmg  to predominate Xdps with a little X%dps

Less dmg to BBs, more to DDs? Hahaha no.

 


And so on and so on - is this a simple bad RNG / got wrecked rage sh*tpost? Really looks like one

  • Cool 1
  • Bad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Players
2,186 posts
12,589 battles
23 hours ago, TomBombardil said:

b.    STILL Can't drop torpedoes from Torpedo bombers close to the map edge!

 

 

There are also issues with torpedoes being dropped near land.

I suspect it is going to be fixed soonTM. :Smile_teethhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
665 posts
5,455 battles
20 hours ago, QuintenCK said:

Isn't the game just become a bit of a mess after each update overwrites some of the mechanics in one way or another?

 

Pretty much. And also because entire mechanics have been ripped out with a crowbar and nothing was done to compensate.

 

I would just be happy if they fixed the matchmaking for now. It is not fun to fight Yamatos with tier 8 Cruisers 9 out of 10 matches. But no time for that i guess, need to add new premium ships every patch, need to make $$.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
5,390 posts
6,781 battles
20 hours ago, wilkatis_LV said:

Premium ship, can't nerf (some laws protecting it bcuz people paid money? something like that from what I've heard). There are many premiums who need some good nerfing

 

I wouldnt agree on that one. Strafing out didnt exist when they released Saipan. They just chose not to let him lose a Fighter plane for Strafing out. So IMO if they would change it, noone could argue that it would get nerfed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
4,945 posts
7,181 battles
4 minutes ago, DFens_666 said:

I wouldnt agree on that one. Strafing out didnt exist when they released Saipan. They just chose not to let him lose a Fighter plane for Strafing out. So IMO if they would change it, noone could argue that it would get nerfed.

Losing a plane = negative. Hordes of potatoes would immediately yell how that's a nerf (wouldn't be when it was introduced, but is now). WG just screwed up with another perfectly balanced premium, and seeing how they buffed GCs torp protection when it already was OP and then "fixed" AP fuses by making them more sensitive... They have no interest in making premiums weaker / balanced, but getting a premium to 60% WR is fine with them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
5,390 posts
6,781 battles
17 minutes ago, wilkatis_LV said:

Losing a plane = negative. Hordes of potatoes would immediately yell how that's a nerf (wouldn't be when it was introduced, but is now). WG just screwed up with another perfectly balanced premium, and seeing how they buffed GCs torp protection when it already was OP and then "fixed" AP fuses by making them more sensitive... They have no interest in making premiums weaker / balanced, but getting a premium to 60% WR is fine with them.

 

But the Strafing out change could be regarded as a game mechanic change, they just "forgot" about Saipan :cap_haloween:

Yes, i dont think they will do it, but i also dont think it could be considered as a nerf, since Saipan was never advertised as such, nor did it have the feature in the beginning.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Beta Tester
176 posts
13,783 battles

Forgot another TWO (edit them in "reminded vendeta's"), or actaly 1, and made the other one it own point

1.      Invis AA from Smoke. When Planes are spotted (which they almost always are with 8km away btw.). and “something“ in smoke can freely (full range) shoot them.

a.      You can’t see the source due to 1. UI inconsistency 2. AA tracers requires animate small objects to be ON.

b.      Zero Smoke AA bloom.

c.      Full effectiveness of AA guns while in smoke?

                                          i.     I don’t get that when in smoke you can still shoot, let alone “render” planes as far as 8,2 km away! (fix) reduce render ranges of planes while IN smoke (think light cyclone here).
 

2.      Consumables Key consistency option

a.      Hydro is Y instead if U because I have 3 consumables instead of 4?
Bismark:      Y= Plane              U= Hydro
Edinbrough: Y=Hydro             U=Smoke
DD:               Y=Speedboost    T=Smoke
Charles:       T= DFAA/hydro  Y=Plane U=Speedboost

b.Give us an OPTION to key-bind consumables instead of consumable SLOTS

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Beta Tester
176 posts
13,783 battles

Since I’m a thinker, a slow typer but moste of all a terrible writer/speller. I don’t have the time to react on all points jet, more to come. The numbering is as a reply to tungstonids numbering and questions (im not quoteing every singel instance)

 

@Tungstonid (and @DFens_666)Thx for the great feedback. I LOVE these critisms becose the open a Discusion. plz share your disagreements Dfens

 

As for @wilkatis_LV if you actually read in to it most of your “accusations” where allready counterd or are also be returned to now. But since the “accusations”  are on the person instead of content I ignore them and its more of a coincidence that they are returned to.

Spoiler
On 2-2-2018 at 9:14 PM, Tungstonid said:

 

On 2-2-2018 at 6:41 PM, TomBombardil said:

2.    Bloom

a.    Bloom duration the same for all ship types (/gun calibres)? (BBs can blinkshoot!?)

b.    No secondary bloom!

c.    0 sec AA bloom

a. As far as I know WG's statement in this matter is that they don't want ships to appear and disappear too quickly and they feel like 20 seconds is the right duration.

b. IMO not needed. I am not aware of any ship with a larger secondary range than spotting range. So why do you even need a secondary bloom?

c. Again, not needed. Ships get spotted by planes as soon as the planes are in the ship's AA range, or rather as soon as the AA guns open fire. The AA range becomes the air detectability. If the planes leave the AA range they also leave the maximum detectability range and therefore any bloom is useless anyway. The only situation I can think of where this is useful is when a stealthy DD or CL gets spotted by planes and activates his AA only as long as the planes are in his detectability range and then deactivates them and stealths up although the planes could still spot it with activated AA. But you can ask people on this forum how much more nerfs DDs and CLs need. :Smile_smile:

2.   

 

a.    Yes this is Wg statement on it, then why is it that BB (and only BB) can disappear between reloads. Aka, blink-shooting. I don’t want a shorter bloom-duration I want a steep exponential function for bloom duration based on ?? (gun-caliber, reload, ship-type). with a minmum of +- 20 sec. 

b.    Secondary bloom is about smoked secondary’s, and it’s a minor issue, mab give them the same smoke bloom as there caliber has when it is the main armament caliber

c.     Spotted “as soon as the AA guns open fire”. And I have a issue with that, giving 0 reaction time. as cv isn’t hard enough

d.    Your “situation” is exactly what happens, and your defense is DD(/CL) don’t need nerfs. My argument, CV don’t need Skill floor and Ceiling increase! I get your point, but since WG need to make CV at least a little bit easier, things like a 5 sec AA activation (P)

 

4.   

Spoiler
On 2-2-2018 at 9:14 PM, Tungstonid said:

 

On 2-2-2018 at 6:41 PM, TomBombardil said:

4.    All premium ships that are removed from shop!

a.    Exclusion and unbalanced

i.     “new” players have no excess to “unbalanced” ships, therefore don’t have excess to compete on equal footing

ii.     “Unbalanced” ships still in the game!

b.    Terms of Service 8.3.g “we do not make any promises about how or when Virtual Goods may be available and can update or change Virtual Goods at any time.”

Well, as the terms of service state as quoted by you, WG has all rights to remove ships from the premium shop and doesn't have to bring them back. So what exactely do you want to say with that? They could do it (and my guess is they will at some point, if only for a short time to make some money out of it) but they currently don't because a lot of the removed ships were ... maybe too strong in the right player's hand. Also, new players need unbalanced/strong premium ships to compete on equal footing with more experienced players? Sorry, but that's pathetic and just not true. How about learning how to play first. A good player in a silver ships will still stomp a newby in a Belfast.

a.    The major point: I mind that there ship “untouchable” OP acknowledge ships in the game.

b.    The minor point: new gaming talent can never get their hands on “op excluded” ships. Hence no change to compete on EQUAL footing. I would actually LOVE a rotation system with all premium shops ships, and let them be ALWAYS under balancing (buff and nerf) review. I’m even in favor of rotating previous event with those event ships as reward. (and here I have to confess selfishness, I missed the Kamikaze R on 35 gold). But I would mind seeing the Graff S. mission back. Or moving some event ship to the rotating shop pool (see smith).

 

Quote
On 2-2-2018 at 9:14 PM, Tungstonid said:

 

On 2-2-2018 at 6:41 PM, TomBombardil said:

1.    (No) Match Making Ranking (mmr)!

a.    Askewer mmr formula better than NO mmr

b.    No incentive to improve, aka "death grind your way to tier X"

Define "Match Making Ranking". It sounds like a new word for skill-based MM and before we have this discussion again, please look at one of the bazillion threads about it that we already have.

 

On 2-2-2018 at 6:41 PM, TomBombardil said:

2.    MM (better a 30-60 sec wait than 7-15 min boring game!)

a.    Radar/Hydro/(DF)AA Dived equally!

b.    Skill (mmr) dived equally, combined Skill of all ship = ± skill of all enemy ships. If possible:

i.     Combined skill of all allied DDs = ±Skill of Enemy DDs

ii.    Combined skill of all allied BBs = ±Skill of Enemy BBS

iii.   Etc.

c.    Stealth divided equally. (karbarof ≠ Z-53, Shimi =± yugimo )

IMO DefAA ships don't have to be equal, especially in games where there is no CV anyway. Same goes for Hydro.

a. A little bit better distribution of radar would be nice. Doesn't have to be 1:1 but at least something to prevent 5 radar ships vs. 0, in other words: to prevent the extreme cases. You shouldn't be able to tell exactely which ship in the enemy team will use which consumable.

b. See the point before.

c. You might have a point there. However, I relish the challenge of having different team compositions with their advantages and disadvantages.

 

On 2-2-2018 at 6:41 PM, TomBombardil said:

3.    Line-riding

a.    see KotS season 2 final and with that winner, line-riding FTW!

i.   (fix?) WoWp Hit border AI controll incoming angel = outgoing angle (min of 30° outgoing)

b.    STILL Can't drop torpedoes from Torpedo bombers close to the map edge!

a. Yes it is annoying although it has changed a lot since WG decided to cut the engine power of ships which use this ... feature.

b. Yes you can. But it is a little bit tricky.

 

On 2-2-2018 at 6:41 PM, TomBombardil said:

4.    DFAA fully scatter ALL!

a.    Full scater 7,2 km away

b.    0 AA value still full scatter

c.    Cv has 0 time to react to DFAA activation, (and 0 activation visibility)

i.    “patched-out” no scatter if DFAA activated later than drop order given!

Can you make this a bit easier to understand?

a. Yes, DefAA also influences planes which are 7,2 km away. Which is actually an advantage because in  this case the CV captain can still retreat his planes before they enter all AA zones. And as a CV you want to drop as close to the ship as possible anyway, so changing this will probably have zero impact on how CVs play (besides that you lose the advantage of knowing when DefAA is activated earlier).

b. The panic effect is given by all AA guns so how do you know it came from the disabled AA guns?

c. What makes DefAA visible is the increased spread of the drop zones. Yes, CVs have zero time to react but is an earlier warning really necessary?

c.i. is this already patched out or do you want it to be patched out?  As far as I know the panic will have an effect as long as the planes haven't dropped their load which IMO is fine.

 

On 2-2-2018 at 6:41 PM, TomBombardil said:

5.    DFAA on CVs

a.    With introduction of “strafe” (/strafe out) 2 min CV DFAA became excessive!

What do you mean by excessive? The DefAA on CVs was introduced after the strafing ability of fighters and should prevent CV sniping early in the game (on tier 8 and up). What is your case?

1.    Well it is a setup for point 2. BUT it has more to do about the incentive to improve. The Emblems are a start (and great at that start) but there still  “grindable”. If you play enough games you will get the win 100 and be top 3 eventually. The average dmg is better, but I don’t like the only parameter to be DMG.

2.    Its not that i want a team full composed of players My skill, i want someONE of equal skill on the opsing team.

3.    a. KotS season 2 had this “feature” and line-riding still decided the outcome of the match
b. then you know more than me. Can you share this? Iirc manual drop on a target parallel to map border can’t be “close droped” since that requires “out of map” mouse click. i can go around it, i can even get planes outside of the map and drop from the other side. But can't click out of the border.

4.   

 

a.    DFAA scatter all squad in range no matter if its 2 or 8 there all effected equally, not even required to priority target an of them.
DFAA scatter is even effective at max range. Doesn’t matter if the drop outside max range (away from DFAA source), the moment of “no return” decides, making DFAA effective for targets +- 2,5 km away from Max AA range.

b.    tested with a Hood, nocked out all it long range AA. Was still able to scatter planes with 0 AA value. The MAJOR point, doesn’t matter how weak/strong AA is, will always scatter, no linearly progression or minimal value.

c.     Yes this high skill “reward bug”/ late risk DFAA is patched out (see Femennenly vid).
Giving a “Icon” (I’m not sure, but I think there is a mod that does this, also for fire (not included in aslainjet)) for ships using DFAA is lowering the CV skill ceiling without changing gameplay. This Info is available if you LOOK closely (AA tracers) but with icon Information is easier to come by. This since CV needs some love in the skill ceiling department!

 

From CBT there is a sarcastic saying “press R to repair ALL. Press Y to win”. Since the introduction of Hydro (&radar) DFAA is diluted a bit. While the core (cbt) complains have never been addressed. And about 7,2 km DFAA is more of a Balancing opinion, that with the introduction of Modules and especial Commander skills AA range became way long, everything is in combined AA range. And BB aa became to strong, amplified by the combination of Secondary + AA commander skill. As insult to injuries the Halved the flood change of TB and gave DD (since BB became high risk zone) DFAA (which got recently buffed to 4X).

 

5.    AS for CVs having DFAA, I was one of the CBT asking for it. As you can see in this post old, see “How to bring back CV” (patch 0.3.X).  But I could never have imagine a high skill mechanic as strafe (koduz WG, I bought some stuff as a reward). First i didnt get the hard cutoff at tier 7/8, especial wiht a 120 sec duration. Secondly, even without strafe a 120 sec duration is on the "ok but kinda long" side imho. BUT since strafing brought back the Skill instead of the 50/50 +lineriding abuse (me getting destroyed by Aerroon). DFAA became a little too much defense from an airstrike, or at least the 2 min dfaa. If you need more than 45 sec before your fighters can defend yourself! You deserve to be struck, which almost exclusively occur at the end of battle (CV last ship alive/no fighters left)

More to come.

Share this post


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

 

 

3.    a. KotS season 2 had this “feature” and line-riding still decided the outcome of the match
b. then you know more than me. Can you share this? Iirc manual drop on a target perpendicular to map border can’t be “close droped” since that requires “out of map” mouse click. i can go around it, i can even get planes outside of the map and drop from the other side. But can't click out of the border.

 

Since it is kind of hard to answer to all points (it involves a lot of scrolling because you didn't quote my answers as well), I'll restrict myself to this point right now.

I have to say right at the beginning that my knowledge about this is a bit older and I usually don't (need to) use it, hence WG might have patched this.

You can manually drop on targets which are riding the red line, however as I said it is tricky. Although you can't send your planes outside of the map, you can still send them there indirectly by giving them a manual drop order near the border and then turn the point from which they attack outside of the map.

 

This video shows how it can be down but as I said I don't know if WG fixed this already because some people abused it in a way that they let their planes fly outside of the map for the whole game to strike the enemy carrier.

Spoiler

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Beta Tester
176 posts
13,783 battles
2 minutes ago, Tungstonid said:

This video shows how it can be down but as I said I don't know if WG fixed this already because some people abused it in a way that they let their planes fly outside of the map for the whole game to strike the enemy carrier.

I made a Huge traslation mistake tough perpendicular = parallel. but it was the opposite (allread edited it)

as m answer on the video. i have isues with the parallel ships. personally i'm skilled enoufh to manually long drop most of them. but it is still a issue.

 

AS far as quoting. sorry for that but i write in words couse of bad spelling. i will try to edit it in.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HABIT]
Beta Tester
1,568 posts
1 minute ago, TomBombardil said:

I made a Huge traslation mistake tough perpendicular = parallel. but it was the opposite (allread edited it)

as m answer on the video. i have isues with the parallel ships. personally i'm skilled enoufh to manually long drop most of them. but it is still a issue.

 

AS far as quoting. sorry for that but i write in words couse of bad spelling. i will try to edit it in.
 

The ships riding the red line parallel is shown directly after the perpendicular one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[ADRIA]
[ADRIA]
Players
4,945 posts
7,181 battles
36 minutes ago, TomBombardil said:

As for @wilkatis_LV if you actually read in to it

Yeah, I answered each point separately to you without reading your post, quite obviously. Or you mean the points I skipped? Either agree with those or nothing to say about them

 

38 minutes ago, TomBombardil said:

most of your “accusations” where allready counterd or are also be returned to now.

What accusations? Use quotes, point out what you mean.

Also the "were already countered or are also be returned to now" - can you try to write that in actual English? Sorry, can't answer to something that doesn't even make sense as a sentence

 

40 minutes ago, TomBombardil said:

But since the “accusations”  are on the person instead of content

WHAT accusations?! I re-read that post, I suggest you doing the same. Use quotes, point it out. All that's there is direct answers to your points.

 

41 minutes ago, TomBombardil said:

I ignore them and its more of a coincidence that they are returned to.

"You disagree so I ignore you" is always a great response, good job :cap_like:

Also again - "its more of a coincidence that they are returned to" - can you re-write it? no idea what you mean

 

And before I read everything that follows - is that an answer to me where you didn't use quotes expecting me to try connecting which answer is meant for which point or is that simply new stuff continuing on your original thread?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[SCRUB]
Beta Tester
176 posts
13,783 battles
40 minutes ago, TomBombardil said:

b. then you know more than me. Can you share this? Iirc manual drop on a target parallel to map border can’t be “close droped” since that requires “out of map” mouse click. i can go around it, i can even get planes outside of the map and drop from the other side. But can't click out of the border.

ok thx. so this "going around tactic" that is shown is here is still availble in theorie. But  in practice un-usabel dou do the excessive amount of time it takes before TB are in postion. All the while being in medium or even short range AA. Let alone the input time requirements. Why not just FIX than you can manual drop closer to the border. making CV more accessible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[HABIT]
Beta Tester
1,568 posts
1 hour ago, TomBombardil said:

ok thx. so this "going around tactic" that is shown is here is still availble in theorie. But  in practice un-usabel dou do the excessive amount of time it takes before TB are in postion. All the while being in medium or even short range AA. Let alone the input time requirements. Why not just FIX than you can manual drop closer to the border. making CV more accessible.

 

This is quite easy to understand. If you make a good manual drop on an enemy ship the manual target (middle of the circle) is behind the enemy ship. To make this possible at or near the red line the player must be able to set points behind the red line which will also enable him to send planes manually there. However, planes which are not on the battlefield anymore but behind the red line are not visible on the mini map, hence as long as the CV player doesn't have team mates or division mates who tell him where the planes are he won't see them.

The reduced engine power should make autodrops or manual drops from longer ranges easier to hit, though. Personally, I don't see that as a big problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×