Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
NZLBROTHERS2016

Cant find a proper title but please read

10 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
104 posts
7 battles

So I've been thinking if battleships had range finders and radar judging by what I know hopefully I'm correct but range finders are people in an armored housing with a telescopic looking pair of binoculars. (again sorry if I sound stupid I didn't really do much research on these) However if these range finders and radars had parts to do with the accuracy of the main battery guns if these were damaged by incoming fire shouldn't that make the firing accuracy a little worse? If you haven't figured out what I'm trying to suggest yet it's a suggestion that if we make these parts vulnerable to incoming fire that should make it more of a challenge to fire at the enemy, if a shell lands on or near the radar dish or range finder it can either render it useless or damaged so the repair ability can fix it otherwise it will take 30 seconds to get the range finder back in to operation, meanwhile if the majority or all range finders are damaged by a full salvo the accuracy of the return fire will be less accurate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
104 posts
7 battles

No. Just...no. 

 

Is that all your gonna say to every one of my suggestions, I've gone from trying to make the game support Arpeggio more to now making the game more realistic and your denying that too? Well what do you want then..... its like honestly if I try to make WG support their collaborations its "No. Just...no." If I try to make WG make their game more realistic its you guessed it "No. Just...no." Come on stop shooting down other peoples thoughts and making them feel useless its not cool, instead actually how about giving your thoughts a go cause clearly you're not understanding what I'm trying to say, if range finders and radar are knocked out how is the ship supposed to aim with dead on accuracy? Doesn't make sense to me, I mean from what my grandfather told me who worked on CL-57 during World War 2 he was told multiple times that if the range finders took a hit the accuracy would be lessened and so I was just thinking "well if this game wants to be as realistic as possible then why don't they try this" then you come along and shoot it down straight away possibly without even reading it properly. Way to go about giving people hope Mr Moderator.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
2,083 posts
5,169 battles

battleship accuracy are already bad enough. i don't even wanted to suffer even worst accuracy because i was in the front tanking shot. NO just NO.

 

just like Ralpthetheatrecat said, this is a game is an ww2 arcade game not a ww2 simulator game.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator
4,163 posts
1,874 battles

 

Is that all your gonna say to every one of my suggestions, I've gone from trying to make the game support Arpeggio more to now making the game more realistic and your denying that too? Well what do you want then..... its like honestly if I try to make WG support their collaborations its "No. Just...no." If I try to make WG make their game more realistic its you guessed it "No. Just...no." Come on stop shooting down other peoples thoughts and making them feel useless its not cool, instead actually how about giving your thoughts a go cause clearly you're not understanding what I'm trying to say, if range finders and radar are knocked out how is the ship supposed to aim with dead on accuracy? Doesn't make sense to me, I mean from what my grandfather told me who worked on CL-57 during World War 2 he was told multiple times that if the range finders took a hit the accuracy would be lessened and so I was just thinking "well if this game wants to be as realistic as possible then why don't they try this" then you come along and shoot it down straight away possibly without even reading it properly. Way to go about giving people hope Mr Moderator.

 

Let it put it this way. Every single ship in the game has rangefinders. All of these rangefinders are out in the open and virtually unarmoured. That means any shell, even the dinky 5" ones landing on or near them are gonna knock them out. And these small guns reload what, every 6 or so seconds? And larger ships reload in 15 to 30 seconds? And you're saying this accuracy debuff should last around 30 seconds?

 

Think about it.

 

What this means is that any ship taking hits is going to be unable to land accurate shots in reply to whatever is shooting at them. Historical accuracy is somewhere around, what, 5%-7% at best, even by the end of world war 2. In game, its 20-35%. Which means that ships in-game are going to be auffering this accuracy debuff pretty much every time they're under fire, rather than the difficulty of achieving this kind of effect in real life. That doesn't really sound fun. Maybe its nice if you're on the giving end, but on the receiving end? No, just no. At some point, historical accuracy has to take a backseat to gameplay. This is why ships don't suffer a loss of combat capability with every hit that would happen in real life (this is simulated by the HP bar - which the devs call combat capability anyway). This is why shells hitting under the waterline don't inflict flooding.

 

Think about what these suggestions entail before posting them. Then perhaps they'll be taken a lot more seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
104 posts
7 battles

No, not the wall of texts!!

 

Umm dude walls of text are important as a means of describing your ideas and thoughts if you don't like them move on this subject isn't for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
26 posts
7,433 battles

 

Is that all your gonna say to every one of my suggestions, I've gone from trying to make the game support Arpeggio more to now making the game more realistic and your denying that too? Well what do you want then..... its like honestly if I try to make WG support their collaborations its "No. Just...no." If I try to make WG make their game more realistic its you guessed it "No. Just...no." Come on stop shooting down other peoples thoughts and making them feel useless its not cool, instead actually how about giving your thoughts a go cause clearly you're not understanding what I'm trying to say, if range finders and radar are knocked out how is the ship supposed to aim with dead on accuracy? Doesn't make sense to me, I mean from what my grandfather told me who worked on CL-57 during World War 2 he was told multiple times that if the range finders took a hit the accuracy would be lessened and so I was just thinking "well if this game wants to be as realistic as possible then why don't they try this" then you come along and shoot it down straight away possibly without even reading it properly. Way to go about giving people hope Mr Moderator.

 

I appreciate what you're asking them to do however imagine those changes and then apply that in your mind to say 'ranking up the Nasseu' or the 'Hatsuharu' or similarly painful vessel... Also it's not a sim man.. if it were your ship would be a lot smaller than the islands your traversing around and you'd see ships way earlier and you'd be shootin over the horizon at markers reported via DD's by radio and as a BB if you even see other vessels chances are you're toast...

 

However there are things that the game could use and your suggestion about how to damage things has been trialled quite a bit and failed a lot in the community I believe;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×