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

Problems with the current meta - speed, spread and stealth

31 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

7
[PANZA]
Alpha Tester
25 posts
1,558 battles

There are three major problems with the current meta of the game, by which I mean the optimal, preferred or majority path to victory in battles. They are, as the title suggests, speed, spread, and stealth.

 

Speed - in many situations, its impossible to tell if a ship is moving forwards or backwards, or how fast they're moving. This is particularly prevalent in the absence of any landmarks to refer ship movement to. Additionally, in some situations it can be difficult or impossible to correctly aim at a ship that is moving in a particular way, for example trying to hit a ship that is pointed directly at you and moving backwards. Finally, cruisers and destroyers that vary their speed can be almost impossible for battleships to hit, due to rapid ship acceleration and slow shell travel time. The rewards for players who sail ships that can utilise speed to their advantage, and the lack of any balance against this mechanism, means that these ships have an unassailable advantage over ships which cannot.

 

The obvious counter to many aspects of speed would be aircraft carriers, but the current meta is such that very few players opt to play aircraft carriers at all. As such, as examples, you get negative gameplay such as cruisers sitting idle behind islands spamming HE without fear of retribution, and US battleships slowly sailing backwards in the face of the enemy whilst tanking almost all incoming fire.

 

Spread - there is no reward for aiming accuracy because shell spread is such that whether you even hit the enemy ship or not is overly reliant on RNG. There can be huge variance in vertical and horizontal dispersion of shells, and there's even massive difference in shell aim between barrels on the same turret pointed in the same direction from the same position!

 

Aiming in this game needs to be high-risk high-reward. Reduce shell dispersion so that accurate aim is rewarded but inaccurate aim is punished. Target ship orientation should weight the game's calculation of your horizontal and vertical shell dispersion (i.e. if target ship is broadside relative to you, you should have less vertical dispersion and more horizontal dispersion. If target ship is perpendicular to you, you should have more vertical dispersion and less horizontal dispersion).

 

Stealth - the ability for ships to hide behind islands, in smoke, or simply being undetectable due to concealment, make destroyers and cruisers overly powerful in the current meta, because the only effective counter to stealth is aircraft carriers...which few players use. Even absent aircraft carriers, the ability for a destroyer to sail with impunity, dropping infinite torpedoes, at distant battleships, is something that needs to be addressed. The fact of the matter is that a single destroyer, as long as their torpedo range is greater than their detection range, could destroy any number of battleships without ever being spotted or shot in return. Putting aside how impossible this would be in reality, from a gameplay perspective the fact that any class has such an unassailable advantage is simply deplorable.

 

The easiest solution to these issues is to see the widespread reintroduction of aircraft carriers to regular gameplay. The fact that destroyers aren't countered by cruisers needs to be addressed, the fact that stealthed cruisers counter battleships needs to be addressed, and the overreliance on a single class (aircraft carriers) to address a multitude of game mechanics needs to be addressed, but in the short-term more aircraft carriers would be a good start.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,174 posts
10,495 battles

Don't you think there are already lot of Nerf, Buff, Rant, Meta questioning and Mechanics questioning posts???? You should've waited for sometime to clear those topics..... Now your Post will be effected by them...... Well nvm I'll read that and post my opinion... 

 

Edit :-
And Well................. Another Make CV Great again Post.... With some complains......

Speed......You talked about reversing of a ship being a big problem... Well, It is not!! You can tell if a ship is moving forward or not by looking at the smoke they release from their boilers... (Or Engine Idk I'm not that much of a nerd). If not game has a mechanic where you can follow your shell's path right??? 

Aiming WG has already addressed that it is the balancing factor Between a Unicum and a newbie...... WG's way of saying Deal With It......

Stealth....... Um...... you're a BB player who occasionally plays a CV right??? BBs are only class having problem against this mechanic...... And let me tell you..... it is working fine and IMO Nothing about them needs to be changed

Edited by Aaditya_AJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LBAS]
Super Tester
1,286 posts

So let me get this straight, to address the current meta covering speed, spread and stealth you want more people to play CV's.

 

Please, do go on.........

Edited by LtDan_IceCream

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
435 posts
6,169 battles

 

The foundation of your arguments is simulator based, fighting the establishment never works.

Extreme arcade traits of this game can be observe in a single ship, call the Mikasa, some are, you will never win or assist your team, it’s one giant magnet for enemy shells, where ocean waves can pass you by and her shells fly like seagulls. The only reason you would play this ship, is for fun and thus reason to play this meta.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,107 posts
7,844 battles

Aiming in this game needs to be high-risk high-reward. 

 

It is

Unless you playing low tier(which Idont think representative of this game) - If you are close, like 15 -12km range. your shot practicly were on targets.

Judging speed is also the art of shooting. But im quoting flamu on this "This game is not about shooting, its not counterstrike"

 

what diffrence about Good player and Bad Player in this game is their decision making, rather than being a Good shoot.

This game is about trading hits, its rare for people to do damage and not reciving any in return - the ability to pick your Better trade is more important than shooting skills

Position and timing is way more important, If you catch them with pants down  - your shooting skill is irrelevant because its so ez shoot

 

If they aware of you shooting at them, even if your shooting is Godlike accurate, and you have laser pinpoint accuracy. they will bounce and non penetration all the way - taking very little damage

its further emphasize in British Cruiser. Playing them is practicly emphasize the game core with  steroids

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
345 posts
3,656 battles

FYI. A battleship can invisifire behind islands too. Imagine sailing on your cruiser not knowing that a hidden BB already shot that ultra lucky 1 shot kill salvo and you didn't even bother to change course since there's no BB near you. Back to port :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[AUSNZ]
Member
420 posts
16,015 battles

Additionally, in some situations it can be difficult or impossible to correctly aim at a ship that is moving in a particular way, for example trying to hit a ship that is pointed directly at you and moving backwards.

 

I would have to say this is one of the easiest ships to hit, especially that Gigantic Yamato who gets lots of love from the hordes of Zao's & De Moines who prowl around.

 

Spread - there is no reward for aiming accuracy because shell spread is such that whether you even hit the enemy ship or not is overly reliant on RNG. There can be huge variance in vertical and horizontal dispersion of shells, and there's even massive difference in shell aim between barrels on the same turret pointed in the same direction from the same position!

 

This is a huge amount of codswallop, both DD's & CL/CA's have very good shell groupings even at the edge of their ranges. While a BB has a greater amount of RNG inherent in it you still benefit from being accurate, the more accurate you place your shots the more chance RNG has to smile upon you.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7
[PANZA]
Alpha Tester
25 posts
1,558 battles

To address a couple of points:

 

If a ship is pointed directly at you, smoke direction doesn't tell you if they're moving forwards or backwards because it points straight up. The other thing is that if its pointed directly at you and sailing backwards, you can't aim behind the ship because the ship itself blocks your shot (i.e. you aim directly at where the ship was, but by the time your shells get there its moved back). Aiming above the ship means your shots land too far back. You can't "adjust" your shot at all, in this case. And its very, very common.

 

"Stealth is working fine" - one destroyer with more torp range than detection range can destroy any number of battleships and cruisers by itself without ever being spotted, without ever drawing any fire. Apparently, according to everyone in this thread, that's perfectly fine. How about making it so that ship silhouettes show up if beyond detection range but this way you still have a shot of blind firing at them? Or how about making cruisers able to spot destroyers from further away (i.e. different detection ranges depending on the other class of ship), and battleships able to detect cruisers from further away? Or, nope, we could stick with the current meta where invisible DDs can rain down infinite torpedoes on cruisers and battleships. WG has already said that some ships being able to fire their guns without being spotted ever is an incorrect mechanic that needs to be fixed. Why doesn't this apply to torpedoes?

 

The fact is that any class of ship in this game should have a reasonable chance of destroying any other class, 1v1. Or are you saying that it's supposed to be fun when factors outside of my control (e.g. teammates, game mechanics) mean that I can be destroyed by unseen enemies without ever being able to shoot back at them or do anything to prevent them from torping me to death?

 

Even at 12-15km, dispersion in battleships (and some cruisers) still sucks. Even if you put yourself in a perfect position, even if your timing is perfect, even if your aim is perfect, the excessive RNG when shooting means that you can still miss completely. I've had shots straddle on both sides of the target (near and far, not left and right), broadside, from under 10km. When you only fire two shots per minute, that's unnecessarily punishing.

 

Yes, I know BBs can stealth fire from behind islands too. Is this game turning into World of Tanks, where every hides behind an obstacle and only peeks out to shoot at someone exposed on the enemy team?

 

"The more accurate you place your shots the more chance RNG has to smile upon you" - that's literally not how RNG works. I can aim perfectly at an enemy ship but huge vertical spread can end up with only one shell falling at the correct distance, with all the other shots falling up to 100m away from where the ship is. When the ship is only 20m or so wide, that's a miss by a factor of five. Yay. So accurate. Much damage. Wow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7
[PANZA]
Alpha Tester
25 posts
1,558 battles

None of this even explains why guns from the SAME TURRET will fire in completely different directions. What?! How did this make it into the game? How is this even physically possible?

 

Also, if everything is perfectly okay with the current meta, then obviously nothing needs to be changed, according to the above commenters. The fact that nobody plays aircraft carriers, that's fine. The fact that every game is decided by cruisers and destroyers alone, that's fine. The fact that whichever team hides behind islands/smoke/stealth more wins, that's fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,174 posts
10,495 battles

 


And HE spam sitting in smoke can me countered by your own team's DD sending torpedoes into the smoke where DD or what ever sitting there and flush him out...
Or is team work that much of a problem now?? Or tell a German Cruiser to Use his Hydro and push the smoke...
 

 

Edited by Aaditya_AJ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
341 posts
2,790 battles

There are three major problems with the current meta of the game, by which I mean the optimal, preferred or majority path to victory in battles. They are, as the title suggests, speed, spread, and stealth.

 

Speed - in many situations, its impossible to tell if a ship is moving forwards or backwards, or how fast they're moving. This is particularly prevalent in the absence of any landmarks to refer ship movement to. Additionally, in some situations it can be difficult or impossible to correctly aim at a ship that is moving in a particular way, for example trying to hit a ship that is pointed directly at you and moving backwards. Finally, cruisers and destroyers that vary their speed can be almost impossible for battleships to hit, due to rapid ship acceleration and slow shell travel time. The rewards for players who sail ships that can utilise speed to their advantage, and the lack of any balance against this mechanism, means that these ships have an unassailable advantage over ships which cannot.

 

The obvious counter to many aspects of speed would be aircraft carriers, but the current meta is such that very few players opt to play aircraft carriers at all. As such, as examples, you get negative gameplay such as cruisers sitting idle behind islands spamming HE without fear of retribution, and US battleships slowly sailing backwards in the face of the enemy whilst tanking almost all incoming fire.

 

Spread - there is no reward for aiming accuracy because shell spread is such that whether you even hit the enemy ship or not is overly reliant on RNG. There can be huge variance in vertical and horizontal dispersion of shells, and there's even massive difference in shell aim between barrels on the same turret pointed in the same direction from the same position!

 

Aiming in this game needs to be high-risk high-reward. Reduce shell dispersion so that accurate aim is rewarded but inaccurate aim is punished. Target ship orientation should weight the game's calculation of your horizontal and vertical shell dispersion (i.e. if target ship is broadside relative to you, you should have less vertical dispersion and more horizontal dispersion. If target ship is perpendicular to you, you should have more vertical dispersion and less horizontal dispersion).

 

Stealth - the ability for ships to hide behind islands, in smoke, or simply being undetectable due to concealment, make destroyers and cruisers overly powerful in the current meta, because the only effective counter to stealth is aircraft carriers...which few players use. Even absent aircraft carriers, the ability for a destroyer to sail with impunity, dropping infinite torpedoes, at distant battleships, is something that needs to be addressed. The fact of the matter is that a single destroyer, as long as their torpedo range is greater than their detection range, could destroy any number of battleships without ever being spotted or shot in return. Putting aside how impossible this would be in reality, from a gameplay perspective the fact that any class has such an unassailable advantage is simply deplorable.

 

The easiest solution to these issues is to see the widespread reintroduction of aircraft carriers to regular gameplay. The fact that destroyers aren't countered by cruisers needs to be addressed, the fact that stealthed cruisers counter battleships needs to be addressed, and the overreliance on a single class (aircraft carriers) to address a multitude of game mechanics needs to be addressed, but in the short-term more aircraft carriers would be a good start.

 

Speed can also be determined by looking at the distance too. The real problem is the fog where you can see nothing at distances.

 

Spread is basically RNG, a factor that WG defends to the point of allowing detonations in a competitive scene. This game is littered with so much RNG that severely devalues skill.

 

Stealth - That is what allows DDs and CAs to survive. I assume you are familiar with the game and main BBs, so I will only be talking about high tiers. DDs are in a pitch where their only defensive ability is smoke. There has been so much powercreep of detection - Sonar and radar on every class and ship (save CVs). The only thing you are missing now is radar on DDs. Most cruisers can be detected by your spotter/fighter plane. Add to this that the survivability of DDs and CAs at high tiers are so bad that a single mistake will cost you your life while BBs are not punished as much. True a DD can torp you invisible but the torps reload at 2 minutes, you'll take a maximum of 2 torps if you turn your bow in, or take measily 12% max HP damage from fires from a cruiser which could easily be repaired by your health pot. Mind you, a cruiser blows up if it shows its broadside for a few seconds and a DD who eats one salvo from a cruiser will be disabled for the rest of the match with their low HP. Smoke also isn't a invulnerability ability. You can easily predict the DD in the smoke and fire at it. I know from anecdotal evidence that SEA does this a lot.

 

"Stealth is working fine" - one destroyer with more torp range than detection range can destroy any number of battleships and cruisers by itself without ever being spotted, without ever drawing any fire. Apparently, according to everyone in this thread, that's perfectly fine. How about making it so that ship silhouettes show up if beyond detection range but this way you still have a shot of blind firing at them? Or how about making cruisers able to spot destroyers from further away (i.e. different detection ranges depending on the other class of ship), and battleships able to detect cruisers from further away? Or, nope, we could stick with the current meta where invisible DDs can rain down infinite torpedoes on cruisers and battleships. WG has already said that some ships being able to fire their guns without being spotted ever is an incorrect mechanic that needs to be fixed. Why doesn't this apply to torpedoes?

 

The fact is that any class of ship in this game should have a reasonable chance of destroying any other class, 1v1. Or are you saying that it's supposed to be fun when factors outside of my control (e.g. teammates, game mechanics) mean that I can be destroyed by unseen enemies without ever being able to shoot back at them or do anything to prevent them from torping me to death?

 

Even at 12-15km, dispersion in battleships (and some cruisers) still sucks. Even if you put yourself in a perfect position, even if your timing is perfect, even if your aim is perfect, the excessive RNG when shooting means that you can still miss completely. I've had shots straddle on both sides of the target (near and far, not left and right), broadside, from under 10km. When you only fire two shots per minute, that's unnecessarily punishing.

 

Stealth is the only thing which gives a class the ability to outskill its counter. Torps are extremely unreliable, unlike shells. You shoot and it takes 10 seconds to reach your target. Torpedos require you to predict where you target will be in a minutes time. Since the addition of Situation awareness is given to everybody, BBs gain a free third eye (most took BoS according to WG?). There are also last known positions. Any person who gets hits in torpedos deserves it. This doesn't apply to BB Shells tho because they can citadel cruisers regardless of angle (which IMO is complete bs).

 

The game has a pesudo counter of BB > CA, CA > DD, DD > BB. But in reality, BBs are the only class to be able to one shot every other class. CAs can only one shot other CAs and DDs have to rely on torpedos.

 

The dispersion of BBs has been buffed severely. They have near cruiser accuracy at 10km now with the powercreep of dispersion mods etc. You can argue that you can only fire two shots but those two shots have more potential than all the shots fired from cruisers and DDs combined assuming you are capable of dodging torpedos (which everyone honestly should).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,107 posts
7,844 battles

None of this even explains why guns from the SAME TURRET will fire in completely different directions. What?! How did this make it into the game? How is this even physically possible?

 

 

Cause its what happen IRL.

not to mention, that Each Gun in same Turret can be elevated diffrently.

 

Technicly speaking, its aerodynamicly imposible for 2 shell  flying closely appart at same time will fall at same distance when they land.

Each subjected to diffrence aerodinamic factor, and Each  will cause Mutual Interference betwen each other.

 

Mutual Interference is closely studied subject in Long range Gunnery era. which especialy plague Triple and Quarduple turrets

 did you know Dunkerque were famous because of its excesive Mutual interference each shell have.

in 1 case French Admiral comment how the hell 1 salvo, can fall 1,1km apart (early dunkerque dispersion is rated around 250-1100m).

 

its because  4 shell flying closely betwen each other, that they interfering with each others - the problem mostly fixed in Jean bart class

 

How they fixed it ? by delaying mechanism during salvo

there is 0.2s delay (for IJN) betwen Firing of each gun - in single Turrets. with delay betwen each turret can be Larger than 0.5s

This mostly solved mutual Interference,

but each shell subjected to diffrent Shock because its fired split seconds apart. with last shell in the last barrel feel the biggest accumulative recoil and shock from previus one

even 0.01 degree on 20km can cause significant distance.

 

so in the end, the pattern still end up being quite random

but have acceptable circular error radius

 

 

Edited by humusz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7
[PANZA]
Alpha Tester
25 posts
1,558 battles

 

You didn't talk about bow on reversing ships in your initial post.. So, You think it is practically hard to hit the targets when they are doing that... It is not actually he might be bow on to 2-3 ships but other ships can see him from a certain angle and hit him.. And you know there are HE shells to set him on fire right? 

 

And you can track shell's path by pressing "Z" and from the second salvo you can aim at his superstructure with HE and get some fires.... So I don't get it why do you think it is impossible to land shots at him.?

 

 

Oh come on Why do you move in straight line in the first place?? If Torpedoes are that much of a problem... I don't see IJN DDs topping every Tier's Stats they are in.... 

 

And HE spam sitting in smoke can me countered by your own team's DD sending torpedoes into the smoke where DD or what ever sitting there and flush him out...

Or is team work that much of a problem now?? Or tell a German Cruiser to Use his Hydro and push the smoke...

 

 

Well You know there is a concept called Rock Papers and Scissors.. Or I'll let WG explain you that....

 

Except I did put bow on reversing ships in my initial post. "Additionally, in some situations it can be difficult or impossible to correctly aim at a ship that is moving in a particular way, for example trying to hit a ship that is pointed directly at you and moving backwards."

 

I can't set them on fire with HE shells if I can't hit them. And I can't hit them if they're bow on moving backwards. Even if I aim at superstructure, it still only aims at the exact distance of the edge that I can see. By the time the shells have traveled that far, the ship has already moved beyond the reach of the shells.

 

1 DD vs 1 BB, guess who wins. 100% of the time, it'll be the DD, unless the DD's detection range is greater than their torp range (pretty much does not apply at high tiers). I say that this is not okay. Your solution is to say that teamwork is the solution. Great, now tell that to all the end-game 1v1 situations where the BB player literally has NO chance to win. That's not fun.

 

Rock Paper Scissors means that, 100% of the time, battleships should kill cruisers, cruisers should kill destroyers, destroyers should kill battleships, and aircraft carriers kind of fit into the middle where they can kill everything but also be killed by everything. Now tell me how a single cruiser can kill an undetectable destroyer. Tell me how a battleship beats a cruiser that hides behind islands spamming HE, and the BB can either sail all the way around the outside and burn to death, or go straight in and get torped to death. That's not rock paper scissors. That's rock rock scissors.

 

 

Speed can also be determined by looking at the distance too. The real problem is the fog where you can see nothing at distances.

 

Spread is basically RNG, a factor that WG defends to the point of allowing detonations in a competitive scene. This game is littered with so much RNG that severely devalues skill.

 

Stealth - That is what allows DDs and CAs to survive. I assume you are familiar with the game and main BBs, so I will only be talking about high tiers. DDs are in a pitch where their only defensive ability is smoke. There has been so much powercreep of detection - Sonar and radar on every class and ship (save CVs). The only thing you are missing now is radar on DDs. Most cruisers can be detected by your spotter/fighter plane. Add to this that the survivability of DDs and CAs at high tiers are so bad that a single mistake will cost you your life while BBs are not punished as much. True a DD can torp you invisible but the torps reload at 2 minutes, you'll take a maximum of 2 torps if you turn your bow in, or take measily 12% max HP damage from fires from a cruiser which could easily be repaired by your health pot. Mind you, a cruiser blows up if it shows its broadside for a few seconds and a DD who eats one salvo from a cruiser will be disabled for the rest of the match with their low HP. Smoke also isn't a invulnerability ability. You can easily predict the DD in the smoke and fire at it. I know from anecdotal evidence that SEA does this a lot.

 

 

Stealth is the only thing which gives a class the ability to outskill its counter. Torps are extremely unreliable, unlike shells. You shoot and it takes 10 seconds to reach your target. Torpedos require you to predict where you target will be in a minutes time. Since the addition of Situation awareness is given to everybody, BBs gain a free third eye (most took BoS according to WG?). There are also last known positions. Any person who gets hits in torpedos deserves it. This doesn't apply to BB Shells tho because they can citadel cruisers regardless of angle (which IMO is complete bs).

 

The game has a pesudo counter of BB > CA, CA > DD, DD > BB. But in reality, BBs are the only class to be able to one shot every other class. CAs can only one shot other CAs and DDs have to rely on torpedos.

 

The dispersion of BBs has been buffed severely. They have near cruiser accuracy at 10km now with the powercreep of dispersion mods etc. You can argue that you can only fire two shots but those two shots have more potential than all the shots fired from cruisers and DDs combined assuming you are capable of dodging torpedos (which everyone honestly should).

 

Hydroacoustic search and radar are counters to smoke, they are not counters to stealth. Hydroacoustic search in particular only has a range of 4km or so, which doesn't penetrate stealth at all. The other thing is that the limited time of hydro and radar (25-35 seconds) only allow most cruisers to get off 3-4 shots. Against a moving destroyer 8-9km away, that isn't enough to kill them. And after cruisers run out of charges, destroyers will still have stealth to slip into.

 

Cruisers do not get destroyed merely for showing their broadside for a few seconds, destroyers do not die from a single salvo, stop exaggerating.

 

What you're saying is that destroyers should have stealth because that's the only way to kill cruisers, which counter destroyers. Cool, so what do battleships get that let them counter destroyers? Nothing. Not a damn thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7
[PANZA]
Alpha Tester
25 posts
1,558 battles

 

Cause its what happen IRL.

not to mention, that Each Gun in same Turret can be elevated diffrently.

 

Technicly speaking, its aerodynamicly imposible for 2 shell  flying closely appart at same time will fall at same distance when they land.

Each subjected to diffrence aerodinamic factor, and Each  will cause Mutual Interference betwen each other.

 

Mutual Interference is closely studied subject in Long range Gunnery era. which especialy plague Triple and Quarduple turrets

 did you know Dunkerque were famous because of its excesive Mutual interference each shell have.

in 1 case French Admiral comment how the hell 1 salvo, can fall 1,1km apart (early dunkerque dispersion is rated around 250-1100m).

 

its because  4 shell flying closely betwen each other, that they interfering with each others - the problem mostly fixed in Jean bart class

 

How they fixed it ? by delaying mechanism during salvo

there is 0.2s delay (for IJN) betwen Firing of each gun - in single Turrets. with delay betwen each turret can be Larger than 0.5s

This mostly solved mutual Interference,

but each shell subjected to diffrent Shock because its fired split seconds apart

even 0.01 degree on 20km can cause significant distance.

 

so in the end, the pattern still end up being quite random

but have acceptable circular error radius

 

 

 

Different elevation affects vertical dispersion, not horizontal. Also, they're elevated exactly the same in the game because they're both in the same turret aimed at the same target.

 

Agree mutual interference is a factor but that would at least result in somewhat consistent results. In this game, shells simply fly anywhere they want within whatever dispersion the game has set because "fun", apparently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
38 posts
2,897 battles

You are arguing by giving specific scenarios in which the battle is more or less decided. And I still cannot visualize what you mean with the reversing ship example. Can you take screenshot of your normal aiming style and in that specific instance so we can discuss better since I swear I never have any troubles with shooting ships in that situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,107 posts
7,844 battles

 

Different elevation affects vertical dispersion, not horizontal. Also, they're elevated exactly the same in the game because they're both in the same turret aimed at the same target.

 

Agree mutual interference is a factor but that would at least result in somewhat consistent results. In this game, shells simply fly anywhere they want within whatever dispersion the game has set because "fun", apparently.

 

The game is a bit excesive about this matter.

But IRL thats what the explanation. 

 

For IJN Heavy Cruiser at least, the shoot from same turret can land betwen 100-150m radius apart at 20km. its CEP mostly shapped like ellips

Edited by humusz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LNA]
Member
1,659 posts
10,430 battles

RNG is the unknown factor that allow a casual player to beat a hardcore one. This is a game and not a sim so everyone should expect something that will not be correct IRL. Instead of trying to fight a meta , try to go with the flow and adapt yourself to the situation at hand so you will get enjoyable experience. Dont try to make every game go your way , it wont. If you dont like the current meta you can try a different server ( each WoWS server favours certain tactic , but Asia favour decisive counter attacks tactic )

RNG are head banging at time , but it can also give you a lol 20km citadel pen or the rare detonation.

If you remove all RNG , the top 10% will always win the rest of the server and people will quit since it is so hard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7
[PANZA]
Alpha Tester
25 posts
1,558 battles

You are arguing by giving specific scenarios in which the battle is more or less decided. And I still cannot visualize what you mean with the reversing ship example. Can you take screenshot of your normal aiming style and in that specific instance so we can discuss better since I swear I never have any troubles with shooting ships in that situation.

 

So in those situations, BB/CA drivers should just give up, sit still and afk, and let the enemy DD have an easy torp to win? Great, so much fun, whoo, why even bother playing at that point just suicide so you can get into the next game quicker.

 

Regardless of specific scenario or not, it boils down to basic game mechanics. Torp destroyer beats battleship. Torp destroyer beats cruiser, which is supposed to counter destroyers. Battleships have no counters for destroyers (other than the risky 'rely on your teammates'). To me, that's poor game mechanics, and it means that battleships will find themselves in hopeless situations where the game mechanics simply prevent them from being able to do anything at all.

 

Image a situation where the enemy ship is perfectly 90 degrees to you. Always, because they're reversing and can turn to match your forwards/backwards movement. All you can see is the front half of their ship. Say that the enemy ship is exactly 10km away from you. Aiming at their superstructure means you're aiming 10.1km away. By the time the shells have travelled that far, the enemy ship has already moved to 10.3km away. Your shells miss entirely. You cannot aim behind where the enemy ship is because aiming at the water above their superstructure means that you're now aiming 12km away, which is much farther than the 10.3km they would be at. Yes/no or do I actually need to take a screenshot?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
1,056 posts
8,994 battles

The easiest solution to these issues is to see the widespread reintroduction of aircraft carriers to regular gameplay. The fact that destroyers aren't countered by cruisers needs to be addressed, the fact that stealthed cruisers counter battleships needs to be addressed, and the overreliance on a single class (aircraft carriers) to address a multitude of game mechanics needs to be addressed, but in the short-term more aircraft carriers would be a good start.

 

CVs already counter DDs, intentionally or not; if you want CVs that can drop on DDs halfway reliably, the captain needs to be skilled (DD dropping is on the harder side of things as far as CVs are concerned).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7
[PANZA]
Alpha Tester
25 posts
1,558 battles

RNG is the unknown factor that allow a casual player to beat a hardcore one. This is a game and not a sim so everyone should expect something that will not be correct IRL. Instead of trying to fight a meta , try to go with the flow and adapt yourself to the situation at hand so you will get enjoyable experience. Dont try to make every game go your way , it wont. If you dont like the current meta you can try a different server ( each WoWS server favours certain tactic , but Asia favour decisive counter attacks tactic )

RNG are head banging at time , but it can also give you a lol 20km citadel pen or the rare detonation.

If you remove all RNG , the top 10% will always win the rest of the server and people will quit since it is so hard

 

All the successful competitive games (CS, Dota, LoL, even WoT to some degree) have almost entirely no RNG. They're almost purely about player skill, and teamwork and coordination. RNG detracts from allowing good players to beat bad players because it means that the gap between the two is reduced. As you say, it allows a casual player to beat a hardcore one...which makes sense, if you want to appeal to casual gamers. If you want to allow people to do well, then you remove RNG.

 

The current meta relies on game mechanics which punish aggressive players, arbitrarily elevate certain ship-types over others, and remove all chance of victory from other ship classes in fairly common situations. There is an overreliance on teamwork to counter single players, which means those players can then have a disproportionate impact on the rest of the game if those counters are absent or uncoordinated. This may not always be reflected on the scoreboard, but a DD torp spread which doesn't land any hits but pushes a battleship out of position so that it gets destroyed is equally as impactful as the torp spread which kills the battleship.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
341 posts
2,790 battles

Hydroacoustic search and radar are counters to smoke, they are not counters to stealth. Hydroacoustic search in particular only has a range of 4km or so, which doesn't penetrate stealth at all. The other thing is that the limited time of hydro and radar (25-35 seconds) only allow most cruisers to get off 3-4 shots. Against a moving destroyer 8-9km away, that isn't enough to kill them. And after cruisers run out of charges, destroyers will still have stealth to slip into.

Cruisers do not get destroyed merely for showing their broadside for a few seconds, destroyers do not die from a single salvo, stop exaggerating.

 

What you're saying is that destroyers should have stealth because that's the only way to kill cruisers, which counter destroyers. Cool, so what do battleships get that let them counter destroyers? Nothing. Not a damn thing.

 

How are they not counters to stealth? Ships inside smoke are invisible, hydro and radar reveals them. Ships behind islands are invisible, hydro and radar reveals them. 2 salvos are enough to kill a DD, especially if everyone starts targeting it (which in most cases do).

 

RNG dictates if the cruiser gets destroyed for showing their broadside and more often than not, they are severely punished for doing so compared to BBs. I said BBs CAN kill DDs in one salvo. You go on and on about the dispersion of BBs while this image proves that BBs have near cruiser levels of accuracy. 8/9 Shells would've killed the DD while 10/10 shells from a cruiser can't delete a DD from full HP.

bGqS3ZD.jpg

 

I'm saying destroyers should have stealth so they can survive. And like I said, the powercreep of radar and hydro on BBs allows them to counter DDs.

Edited by LunaticRed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7
[PANZA]
Alpha Tester
25 posts
1,558 battles

 

CVs already counter DDs, intentionally or not; if you want CVs that can drop on DDs halfway reliably, the captain needs to be skilled (DD dropping is on the harder side of things as far as CVs are concerned).

 

Yes, except nobody plays CVs. Anecdotally, from my gaming tonight, between tier 5-9, fewer than 10% of games had CVs. Every game had destroyers. How do we counter destroyers if what's supposed to counter them (cruisers) doesn't, and the other counter (aircraft carriers) are almost never seen?

 

That's why I argue that CVs should be brought back into the meta more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7
[PANZA]
Alpha Tester
25 posts
1,558 battles

 

How are they not counters to stealth? Ships inside smoke are invisible, hydro and radar reveals them. Ships behind islands are invisible, hydro and radar reveals them. 2 salvos are enough to kill a DD, especially if everyone starts targeting it (which in most cases do).

 

RNG dictates if the cruiser gets destroyed for showing their broadside and more often than not, they are severely punished for doing so compared to BBs. I said BBs CAN kill DDs in one salvo. You go on and on about the dispersion of BBs while this image proves that BBs have near cruiser levels of accuracy. 8/9 Shells would've killed the DD while 10/10 shells from a cruiser can't delete a DD from full HP.

bGqS3ZD.jpg

 

I'm saying destroyers should have stealth so they can survive. And like I said, the powercreep of radar and hydro on BBs allows them to counter DDs.

 

Hydro reveals in smoke...from 4km away. By the time you get to within 4km, you've been torped. Radar reveals in smoke...for 25 seconds. Three salvos doesn't kill a destroyer from 9km away, if you even hit it at all. I've literally just a had where a Farragut took five salvos (each of which connected) from a Shchors from 4km away and still made it out alive, so I don't know where this "two salvos kills a destroyer" comes from. As you just said in your next paragraph, 10/10 hits from a cruiser won't kill a destroyer, and how often does a cruiser manage to land 5/10 shots on a moving destroyer from 10km away?

 

"Here is one picture where RNG favoured me with a greater than average number of hits on a destroyer".

 

"Here is a situation which arises every game whereby invisible destroyers drop torps with impunity from stealth."

 

"Haha I had one picture therefore your entire argument is incorrect."

 

Fantastic.

 

Once again, hydro and radar counter SMOKE. They do not counter STEALTH.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
38 posts
2,897 battles

 

So in those situations, BB/CA drivers should just give up, sit still and afk, and let the enemy DD have an easy torp to win? Great, so much fun, whoo, why even bother playing at that point just suicide so you can get into the next game quicker.

 

Regardless of specific scenario or not, it boils down to basic game mechanics. Torp destroyer beats battleship. Torp destroyer beats cruiser, which is supposed to counter destroyers. Battleships have no counters for destroyers (other than the risky 'rely on your teammates'). To me, that's poor game mechanics, and it means that battleships will find themselves in hopeless situations where the game mechanics simply prevent them from being able to do anything at all.

Topr destroyers beat battleship , that's a given since they ARE supposed to be the counter to BBs in this game no? (and I'm already assuming the DD players are capable of throwing decent torp walls).  Disagree with torps beats cruisers as with the introduction of Radar and Hydro Search buff, I fail to see how a CA can be beaten by a torps DD if he knows what he is doing. After the DD miss the torp salvo, what can he do against a CA?

Image a situation where the enemy ship is perfectly 90 degrees to you. Always, because they're reversing and can turn to match your forwards/backwards movement. All you can see is the front half of their ship. Say that the enemy ship is exactly 10km away from you. Aiming at their superstructure means you're aiming 10.1km away. By the time the shells have travelled that far, the enemy ship has already moved to 10.3km away. Your shells miss entirely. You cannot aim behind where the enemy ship is because aiming at the water above their superstructure means that you're now aiming 12km away, which is much farther than the 10.3km they would be at. Yes/no or do I actually need to take a screenshot?

Still can't gaps what's the trouble with your aiming here sorry since I never have trouble in these situations.

 

Share this post


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

×