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

What will happen if enemy ship HP bars were hidden?

What do you think would happen?  

38 members have voted

  1. 1. Will playstyle become more aggressive or more camp?

  2. 2. Will players die more easily?

  3. 3. Will players help team more?

  4. 4. Will players focus on objectives more?

    • Yes! Objectives.
    • No! Farm safely.
  5. 5. Which ship class would benefit most from this change?

  6. 6. Which ship class would be hurt most by this change?

  7. 7. Will this make the game more balanced?

  8. 8. Will this make the game more interesting?

  9. 9. Would you support such a change.

    • Yes
    • Maybe
    • No
    • H~~ell No.
    • I support change, but not this change. (comment)

19 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Beta Tester
795 posts
4,327 battles

As titled. 

How will WoWs as we know it be different, if the HP bars of enemies are not shown by default, or would only be shown when spotted from a very close range?

Teammate's HP bars will always be visible.

 

Please leave your reasoning in the comments below.

  • Bad 2
  • Angry 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[NWP]
Players
888 posts
8,163 battles

Dude your posts become more and more....extravagant.

What is the point of not knowing if an enemy is at 5 HP and you want to kill him off and win the game.

How could that implemantation be an  improvement of the gameplay in any possible way?

  • Cool 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[1DSF]
Beta Tester
1,366 posts
4,156 battles

Sorry but i think this would be very stupid, and this poll is it too!

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TEACH]
Alpha Tester
2,324 posts
9,088 battles

I think this is a great idea, but instead of removing them lets make them really hard to see for BB players, so it'll force them to get closer to see what they are.

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 9

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
2,882 posts
12,099 battles

I wouldn't mind trying it in a different, 'realistic' mode coupled with some other changes, but I think the playerbase needs to grow a bit before that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[T-N-T]
[T-N-T]
Weekend Tester, Players, In AlfaTesters
3,808 posts
9,214 battles

I will also remove your own ship HP bar for pure fun of guessing if I die after this enemy salvo or not  :cap_haloween:

  • Cool 1
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-TXG-]
Players
2,368 posts
19 hours ago, Shaka_D said:

I think this is a great idea, but instead of removing them lets make them really hard to see for BB players, so it'll force them to get closer to see what they are.

The low health BB would be well on his way to the back with hidden low health so no chance of getting closer for a crafty look. :Smile_Default:

 

18 hours ago, Sigimundus said:

I will also remove your own ship HP bar for pure fun of guessing if I die after this enemy salvo or not  :cap_haloween:

Maybe also remove visual shell fire and where they land for added mystery. :Smile_teethhappy:

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TEACH]
Alpha Tester
2,324 posts
9,088 battles
3 minutes ago, bushwacker001 said:

Maybe also remove visual shell fire and where they land for added mystery. :Smile_teethhappy:

And also any visual reference to fires and flooding so your ship hp mysteriously diminishes without you knowing why.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[B0TS]
Beta Tester
1,610 posts
5,167 battles
32 minutes ago, loppantorkel said:

I wouldn't mind trying it in a different, 'realistic' mode coupled with some other changes, but I think the playerbase needs to grow a bit before that.

Personally I think it would be less realistic if you had no idea that a target ship was heavily damaged - damaged ships list, burn, have bits missing, sail around in circles, not moving etc etc etc.

 

Such a route would actually dumb down the game by removing the 'advantage' of seeing then choosing to remove damaged ships from the enemy roster instead of farming the full HP BB's for more actual damage points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[VAR]
Players
602 posts
7,695 battles

Bad idea for the current game modes and even more idiotic for a kind of realistic game mode ... 

 

The idea is as good as not having an indicator in your car showing how much fuel you have 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
205 posts
961 battles

You're effectively proposing to remove a piece of information that is critical in deciding whether to go on the offensive or not in hopes of making the game less of a campfest?

 

Are you a WG game designer perchance? :cap_book:

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[B0TS]
Beta Tester
1,610 posts
5,167 battles
30 minutes ago, Ulvesnutepostei said:

The idea is as good as not having an indicator in your car showing how much fuel you have 

Having been there, done that with a broken fuel gauge, it was not fun at all on long journeys.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
894 posts
11,126 battles
54 minutes ago, Sigimundus said:

I will also remove your own ship HP bar for pure fun of guessing if I die after this enemy salvo or not  :cap_haloween:

Honestly, for the sake of a single operation / scenario, I'd try that out, but only if there would be some visual clues that "Hm, I think the ship might be a bit f*cked". Broken steam pipes, fires, ship listing and slowing down, alarm bells, reports of counter-flooding, whatnot.

Same with the the enemy, "Is it unable to fight? Is it sinking, or just temporarily inoperable? Should I pass over another salvo or prioritize other targets?"

 

But again: Scenario, tops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[TRAV]
[TRAV]
Players
2,504 posts

So many poll questions missing the option "nothing will change". Instead there are biased opinions added to what could be a simple "yes" or "no". On question 2 the answers don't even fit the question.

 

Instead of voting in that messed up thing I'll keep it simple and just say:

I doubt that such a change would benefit the game in a way you would like, @KarmaQU_EU.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[-FF-]
Players
609 posts
5,414 battles

The six first questions of the poll are complete non-sense.

2 hours ago, tank276 said:

Dude your posts become more and more....extravagant.

What is the point of not knowing if an enemy is at 5 HP and you want to kill him off and win the game.

How could that implemantation be an  improvement of the gameplay in any possible way?

Correct

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Players
2,743 posts
15,586 battles
2 hours ago, KarmaQU_EU said:

What will happen if enemy ship HP bars were hidden?

 

i tell you woud would rob the game of a part of its tactical depth

 

terrible idea that sounds nice for maybe the first few seconds till you start using your brain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
795 posts
4,327 battles

@Egoleter Well that is the reason I did not bother bringing this up despite having thought of it 2 years ago. And if you'd see some of the options I voted for, I'm not ... er, overly biased for it either. I was just bored, and interested enough in it to do a quick half-assed post about it.

 

The problem with a "nothing will change" option is that it implies a current stance already, but without mentioning the current stance. In some cases, the current stance is not only already biased, but varies by people, for instance whether people think the current meta is campy. So for instance, the answer to question "4" can pretty much be interpreted as "nothing will change". The answers for questions 5-7 were pretty much expected, as I voted for the same too.

 

But some interesting conclusions that can already be made from this is how unfair the cruisers have it, even in the current meta. They are ... "desirable" targets.

 

 


Otherwise, 

1. Camp. Implies players will be more likely to huddle as fleet if HP was removed. I intend that, more teamwork. It also implies players do rely heavily on information to contest objectives. Good, we can design for that. Also design those objectives to be achievable with a semi-campable style, as players desire. See? mind-blowing game improvements already.

2. Less die. I also intend that. Now, working as a team will prevent death, so there is incentive for it. Less "omg they are focusing me so unfair" would likely improve the game as well. Also, much game design possibility reflected in this, even at its current state. Now, ships actually have an option to turn back and hide behind allies if they are hurt, and encourages team to play smart to utilize this information disparity (such as sending in fake charges with a crippled ship to scare away ppl). It would also promote less "purposeful" gameplay like trying to snipe that DD running across the map simply in desire to kill it and get 15% hp contribution. Of course, objectives will have to be observed and designed to accommodate this change, especially that "gain points when destroy enemy ship" mechanic.

3. I intend for that to be yes team, but it seems this factor alone is not a deciding factor. Good! Now we know. Continue to design.

4. As said, with the proper incentives and game design, a DD will be willing to banzai into a torpedo wave. It's all about design. Perhaps it'll be more willing to banzai in if the team worked together? To eat those torpedoes for another target? Etc.

5. and 6. Just shows how bias and unbalanced the current game is. Well, at least it shows something.

7. and 8. Of course, just this alone is not expected to perform miracles. But the answers were honest, and likely usable.

9. See? it's not as despairing as some would make it out to be. Though still despairing.
 

 

 

The true thing, @Egoleter, is that this was only envisioned with an incredible amount of other changes, 60k words of condensed notes, to be exact, all 2 years ago. One of the changes was a points-based tierpoint system, instead of tier 1-10. Thus that each ship would be assigned a "power-rating" based off of many factors, but primarily their tier and class. In other words, targets now have strategic worth and value. Would you focus on the valuable big BB, or the mob of weak DDs? Would you compose your team, with high-cost high-potential ships, or swarms of cost-effective cruisers? Imagine the tactics that will go into composing a competitive team under that game design.

Almost every mechanic would see change. New mechanics would be added. Player number per game, per team, per map, would increase, amongst other things. Vision will be different, there would be an "intel" rating, gathered by spotting. Similar to how resources are used in other RTS games, this could be used to call in reinforcements, but wait, should I call in high tierpoint, but less reinforcements, or low tierpoints but more reinforcements? Should I call in experienced divisioned players or just randoms? This HP-vision-check is just one of many many changes. Did you know vision would have like 5 tiers, instead of the current binary differentiation?

Fleet compositions would have different tierpoint "discounts", for instance BB lines, Cruiser escort fleets, Carrier strike fleets, all adding in to game depth and strategic consideration. 

And this is just touching upon the possibilities an improved core system would bring to this game, over the decades-old tier 1-10 system. New weapons, gamemodes, map design, event design, everything WoWs ever could have had, every conceivable aspect down to the difference in water characteristics, even wave forms depending on geographic location (which will have actual affects in the game, for instance, on less stable ships overloaded with heavy weapons), I had examined and noted. WG is just getting around to the water characteristics, and only in visual form, and only in select locations too, a whole 2 years later. I had sandbanks, floating, moving icebergs ... radar would actually work like radar, there would be spotlights, flares, chaff, smoke, decoys, acoustic trorpedoes! ... And this is just from memory, and only a fringe of everything that was conceived.

60k words on every conceivable aspect, I tell you, and that is not even including analysis' and smaller reports stolen from other games. I willed this game to be art, to be state-of-the-art, and to be excellent. I used seriousness reserved for non-gaming into that report. I was caught up in the passion and excitement of players from back then, when players still believed in this game, all 650k of them, and more than one project of such kind was being worked on.

This recent news on CV overhaul is getting me excited again. Yes, I haven't even gotten to the aerial sphere designs yet! Truly exciting. 

But I care not for this design. I haven't bothered to re-examine it recently (in more than a year to be exact), the closest I got was all the pictures and referential photos in the main folder. Why? WoWs doesn't need it. There is no realistic way it could come to be.

So I am just humoring myself. Like with this unreasonable poll. Like we all are on this forum. Just killing time, waiting, for the next time WG will do something, some waiting longer than others ...

But someday it will end, I will be done with WoWs, and I will permanently delete all the folders. Or send them all to Gaijin in a rage, oh how silly heheheh. No, if I'd do it I'd already have done so. This is not something to joke about.

 

Heheheh, benefit the game indeed. Even if it could benefit, it wouldn't even be the same game anymore. And oh, you haven't seen extravagant. But it's unlikely I'll ever be motivated enough to do true extravagant. My interest in this game hangs by a thread. All the results of this poll, and more I have already concluded and designed for in the notes, perhaps unfinished, but more than I'd ever care to consider nowadays. This poll is just for entertainment.

 

Edit: Oh I almost forgot the most important part. Obviously in the new design ships would not function the same with 1 HP as if they had 100k. Ships list, use water and oil to correct that list, then list some more and explode and sink. Damage control is a big part of the design from the notes. Did I mention before (I didn't) that we'd get to see the ships sinking (from) below the water too? Mind-blowing. Perhaps WG would get to that in another year or two.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[BAD-A]
Players
51 posts
8,174 battles

I didn't reply to the poll as your missing a key question - what affect would this have on players! Personally, I think it would cause significant stress to players and also incur an increase in accusations of cheating and overall make chat more toxic.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[UNICS]
Players
2,882 posts
12,099 battles
2 hours ago, philjd said:

Personally I think it would be less realistic if you had no idea that a target ship was heavily damaged - damaged ships list, burn, have bits missing, sail around in circles, not moving etc etc etc.

 

Such a route would actually dumb down the game by removing the 'advantage' of seeing then choosing to remove damaged ships from the enemy roster instead of farming the full HP BB's for more actual damage points.

Personally you'd think that removing the HP bar from sight would make it less realistic? You could look for other clues like the ones you listed for how damaged the ship is.

It wouldn't dumb down the game, but I'm fairly sure it could cause more frustration and make the game less accessible. Probably a good idea to keep the HP bar in the game, but I wouldn't mind trying it in a new game mode with some other alterations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×