Jump to content
You need to play a total of 10 battles to post in this section.
HMS_Swiftsure_08

What do you guys think about the three new changes?

What's your opinion of the three new changes WG just announced for testing?  

41 members have voted

  1. 1. Smoke-firing change

    • It's totally great
      9
    • The idea is great but the numbers may need tweaks
      15
    • Both the idea and the numbers should be changed a bit
      8
    • Wargaming has yet again come up with the worst idea ever
      5
    • Meh
      4
  2. 2. IFHE change

    • It's totally great
      8
    • The idea is great but the numbers may need tweaks
      18
    • Both the idea and the numbers should be changed a bit
      4
    • Wargaming has yet again come up with the worst idea ever
      8
    • Meh
      3
  3. 3. Radar change

    • It's totally great
      7
    • The idea is great but the numbers may need tweaks
      11
    • Both the idea and the numbers should be changed a bit
      5
    • Wargaming has yet again come up with the worst idea ever
      11
    • Meh
      7

27 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Member
1,386 posts
8,224 battles

The smoke-firing change, resulting in the smoke puff you are sitting in less effective when you are firing

IFHE change, -1% for 139mm-, -8% for larger guns

Radar change, resulting in different detection range for each type of ship, no change for VMF, USN gets slightly larger range for bigger ships, RN lower range against DD and impressive increase across ship type (DD-CL/CA-BB-CV)

Edited by _Halcyon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,386 posts
8,224 battles
15 minutes ago, drakon233 said:

looks at kahbba

russian bi....

looks at MK

 

i stand corrected

The Russians are moving from Stalin era to Khrushchev era, which means they tear old worn Stalin ships apart to reinforce newer ships, for example Grozovoi and... Missile ships I guess, "new weapon types" in plan 2017 remember?:cap_book:

Edited by _Halcyon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[MEGA]
Member
4,562 posts
17,552 battles
Just now, _Halcyon said:

The Russians are moving from Stalin era to Khrushchev era, which means they tear Stalin ships apart to reinforce newer ships, for example Grozovoi and... Missile ships I guess, "new weapon types" in plan 2017 remember?:cap_book:

i thought they were talking about mines

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
381 posts
9,957 battles

1) Smoke-firing: the idea is good but the test number is excessive. The point of this change should be to remove ridiculous situations like a BB sitting 6km away in smoke and shoot with impunity, not completely removing the ability to hide and shoot in smoke for them. I would change the number to 6/10 for CA/BB.

 

2)  IFHE change: not needed at all. Cruisers at t8 and below are generally not as influential as BB/DD and WG shouldn't nerf CL anymore. What should be done is to buff mid tier CA to be more competitive. Reddit already has a post about this.

 

3) Radar change: another unnecessary waste of resources. UK cruisers already risk their life choosing radar over smoke. Why nerf their ability to spot DD with radar? NO might use a bit of a buff but radar buff would be the last thing it needs. Baltimore + Des Moines are very competitive and don't need any kind of buff either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,106 posts
7,834 battles
1 hour ago, drakon233 said:

i thought they were talking about mines

only AP bomb is considered new type

mines basicly NPC or NPW (non playable weapons lol)

 

either way

IFHE nerf is fine (I own MK, Belfast and totaly fine with it). I always consider that skill is so broken that there is no point of using 203.

the buff it gave to destroyer however, oh boy oh boy. I test it on Khabarovsk and kiev once, and it totaly mutilated T8-T9 cruiser and brutaly violated T10 ones

every salvo is 4-6k the only non pen is when the shell hit turret.

damage farmer wise its better to not use IFHE and burn battleship. but with IFHE this russian bias is brutal, I melt full hp mogami in 40s

this nerf will give those speedy russian devil re-surgence. with only 1% penalty. IFHE will enter meta build on no time

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LLBC]
Member
747 posts
6,851 battles
2 hours ago, humusz said:

the buff it gave to destroyer however, oh boy oh boy. I test it on Khabarovsk and kiev once, and it totaly mutilated T8-T9 cruiser and brutaly violated T10 ones

every salvo is 4-6k the only non pen is when the shell hit turret.

damage farmer wise its better to not use IFHE and burn battleship. but with IFHE this russian bias is brutal, I melt full hp mogami in 40s

this nerf will give those speedy russian devil re-surgence. with only 1% penalty. IFHE will enter meta build on no time

 

 

 

Or just have it like this:

-1% for x < 130mm caliber (To prevent russians botes from getting the buff)

-3% for 130mm < x <149mm caliber (Same as ever for "intermediate" calibers)

-6% for larger calibers

 

Edited by Admiral_Neptulussus

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,106 posts
7,834 battles
15 minutes ago, Admiral_Neptulussus said:

 

Or just have it like this:

-1% for <129mm caliber (To prevent russians botes from getting the buff)

 

Noooooooooooo.....................................

(^screaming no in russian)

Edited by humusz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[LLBC]
Member
747 posts
6,851 battles
6 minutes ago, Shiroyasha_Gintoki said:

*thinking about Atlanta/Flint*...
Even more NOOOOO...

 

Is that the NOOO cuz that would be overpowered, or the opposite?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Beta Tester
604 posts
6,756 battles

Smoke firing change is excellent, BB's have no place at all firing their guns from smoke - that's what they have huge health pools, armour and heals for.  Almost certainly it will go live as is.

Radar change is fine, but won't really make any noticeable difference to the game - no change for DD detection, and the ranges of 10km for cruisers and 12km for BB's are less than their ideal firing ranges anyway, so you won't find many within those ranges.

IFHE change is an issue, I feel there will be some tweaking with this one.  They are clearly trying to nerf the power of HE firing CL's, but the only ships that are really out of line are a couple of premiums, so they are nerfing a whole class of ships because they refuse to nerf premiums.  I personally think they are going at this the wrong way - the main problem is there being a hard penetration cutoff for HE - if the armour is less than the cutoff you do a heap of damage, if it's more you do none.  I personally think a better way to solve this issue would be to have a range where sometimes the shell pens and sometimes it doesn't in an armour thickness range around the current HE pen formula.  That would mean not taking IFHE wouldn't be so debilitating where you just can't do damage against some targets.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,386 posts
8,224 battles
3 hours ago, PGM991 said:

it's tough to score a hit already even in 12 km torp, but now there's some radar that extend to 11.7 km ... 

 

T_T

VMF radar has always been 11.7km. Even the T8 Chapayev is 11.7km, it has been using the same 11.7km/20secs radar since early 2016 when radar was added to the game. Actually the radar change didn't affect DDs much, the only affect comes from RN radar which got reduced range against DD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,124 posts
6 minutes ago, _Halcyon said:

VMF radar has always been 11.7km. Even the T8 Chapayev is 11.7km, it has been using the same 11.7km/20secs radar since early 2016 when radar was added to the game. Actually the radar change didn't affect DDs much, the only affect comes from RN radar which got reduced range against DD.

wait what? really? .... hmm I haven't notice that...

always assume that 10 km is the least safe distant to keep tailing radar ship... =w='a

Edited by PGM991

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,386 posts
8,224 battles
9 minutes ago, PGM991 said:

wait what? really? .... hmm I haven't notice that...

always assume that 10 km is the least safe distant to keep tailing radar ship... =w='a

Chapayev/Dimitri 11.7km 20s (28s)

Moskva 11.7km 25s (35s)

Atlanta/Belfast 8.49km 25s

New Orleans/Edinburgh 9km 30s

Baltimore/Neptune 9.45km 35s (49s)

Des Moines/Minotaur 9.9km 40s (56s)

Missouri 9.45km 35s

Black 7.58km 20s (28s)

Indianapolis 9.9km 25s

 

underlines means you may encounter ships with radar mod, extending operation time from the original value to the value inside the brackets

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
412 posts
9,223 battles

GIVE BACK RN 9.0KM, 9.45KM, AND 9.9KM RADAR!!!! :Smile_izmena:

 

Personally, I grind the RN CL line from Edinburgh -> Minotaur almost most of the time using radar. Tbh, yes Minotaur current 1 km radar buffer seems legit, but that's how the ship works, flushing DDs out of the cap and take the cap for the team. Reworked radar Edinburgh seems about the same as the current radar Neptune. Radar Neptune will be the one suffers from this rework, and can only work when playing as division. She cant survive with 8.7km radar range @ 10.1km detection.

 

IMO They should have the same treatment as USN CA. I don't care if I can't radar CV from 18km away anymore. DDs win game and RN CLs are DD counters.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
224
[151ST]
Member
1,011 posts
4,497 battles

They need to make it so Radar doesn't go through land.

 

As for Radar distance, IMO should be something like:

DD auto-spotted 8.5km

CL/A auto-spotted 10km

BB auto-spotted 15km

 

Then add a bit of variation between nations as already have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
420 posts

I've heard about the smoke changes and it I feel that they make sense.

For the IFHE nerf, my concern is about the low fire chance cruisers.  I think that if your fire chance drops below 2% with IFHE, then the fire chance nerf should stop at 2%.  This would give those cruisers with DE to have a destroyer level fire chance.  That seems fair to me, instead of hitting some ships with 0 or negative fire chance.  

By the way, with the negative fire chance, instead of setting the other ship on fire, you set yourself on fire?  Could that happen in the game?  Bad ammo handling procedures? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Member
1,386 posts
8,224 battles
1 hour ago, BunnyDragon said:

I've heard about the smoke changes and it I feel that they make sense.

For the IFHE nerf, my concern is about the low fire chance cruisers.  I think that if your fire chance drops below 2% with IFHE, then the fire chance nerf should stop at 2%.  This would give those cruisers with DE to have a destroyer level fire chance.  That seems fair to me, instead of hitting some ships with 0 or negative fire chance.  

By the way, with the negative fire chance, instead of setting the other ship on fire, you set yourself on fire?  Could that happen in the game?  Bad ammo handling procedures? 

AP shells have -50% fire chance, so negative fire chance only gives you no fire, it's not like how Mutsu end up being the only Big7 to sink a Big7 by detonating herself

Edited by _Halcyon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Super Tester
802 posts
13 hours ago, LunaStinger said:

2)  IFHE change: not needed at all.

 

IFHE is basically broken at the moment because you can buff your fire chance with flags and DE to effectively negate the reduction in fire chance. Now it will actually become a choice between penetrating a target and burning him. (Assuming, of course that the change actually goes through)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×